LIBRARY 

or  THK 

University  of  California. 


OIF^r  OK 


TriA/i.WvTYv^      Vzr^^z/^. 

^ccessiot?     ^^B09  Class 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


IN 


THEIR  BEAEMG  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE; 


C2V  |)oUtical  ajjtpostitlatton. 


BY  THE  RIGHT  HON.  W.  E.  GLADSTONE,  M.P. 


TO  WHICH  ARE  ADDED  : 

A  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL; 

TOGETHER  WITH  THE  LATIN  AND  ENGLISH  TEXT  OF 

THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  and  THE  VATICAN  DECREES. 


BY  THE  REV.  PHILIP  SCIIAFF,  D.D. 

FROM  HIS  FORTHCOMING  '  HISTORY  OF  THE  CREEDS  OF  CHRISTENDOM. 


NEW    YORK: 
HARPER    &    BROTHERS,    PUBLISHERS, 

FRANKLIN    SQUARE. 

18  7  5. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1874,  by 

HARPER  &   BROTHERS, 

In  the  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  Washington. 


24^^      .^T^"f' 


C 


CONTENTS. 


Pagk 

THE  VATICAN  DECREES  IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL 
ALLEGIANCE.  By  the  Right  Hon.  Wm.  E.  Gladstone, 
M.P 9 

HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.     By  the  Rev.  Philip 

SCHAFF,  D.D 51 

THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS.     (Latin  and  English 

Text.) 109 

THE  VATICAN  DECREES.     (Latin  and  English  Text.) 131 


86609 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


IN 


THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE, 

BY  THE 

RIGHT  HON.  W.  E.  GLADSTONE,  M.R 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

I.  The  Occasion  and  Scope  of  this  Tkact.     Four  Propositions. 

Are  they  True  ? 9 

II.  The  First  and  Fourth  Propositions.  (1)  '  That  Rome  has 
substituted  for  the  proud  boast  of  semper  eadem  a  policy  of 
violence  and  change  in  faith.'  (4)  '  That  she  has  equally 
repudiated  modern  thought  and  ancient  history' 13 

III.  The  Second  Proposition — 'That  she  has  refurbished  and  pa- 
raded anew  every  rusty  tool  she  was  thought  to  have  dis- 
used'.     15 

lY.  The  Third  Proposition — 'That  Rome  requires  a  convert  who 
now  joins  her  to  forfeit  his  moral  and  mental  freedom,  and  to 
place  his  loyalty  and  civil  duty  at  the  mercy  of  another'  ...    18 

V.  Being  True,  are  the  Propositions  Material? 33 

VI.  Being  True  and  Material,  were  the  Propositions  Proper 

TO   BE    set  forth  BY   THE   PRESENT  WrITER  ? 39 

VII.  On  THE  Home  Policy  of  the  Future 42 


Appendices 47 


THE  YATICAN  DECREES 


IN 


THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


I.  The  Occasion  and  Scope  of  this  Tract. 

In  the  prosecution  of  a  purpose  not  polemicalj  but  pacific,  I  liave 
been  led  to  employ  words  whicli  belong,  more  or  less,  to  the  region  of 
religious  controversy ;  and  which,  though  they  were  themselves  few, 
seem  to  require,  from  the  various  feelings  they  have  aroused,  that  I 
should  carefully  define,  elucidate,  and  defend  them.  The  task  is  not 
of  a  kind  agreeable  to  me ;  but  I  proceed  to  perform  it. 

Among  the  causes  which  have  tended  to  disturb  and  perplex  the 
public  mind  in  the  consideration  of  our  own  religious  diflficulties,  one 
lias  been  a  certain  alarm  at  the  aggressive  activity  and  imagined 
growth  of  the  Roman  Church  in  this  country.  All  are  aware  of  our 
susceptibility  on  this  side ;  and  it  w^as  not,  I  think,  improper  for  one 
who  desires  to  remove  every  thing  that  can  interfere  with  a  calm  and 
judicial  temper,  and  who  believes  the  alarm  to  be  groundless,  to  state, 
pointedly  though  briefly,  some  reasons  for  that  belief. 

Accordingly  I  did  not  scruple  to  use  the  following  language  in  a 
paper  inserted  in  the  number  of  the  Contemporary  Reviexo  for  the 
pionth  of  October  [1874].  I  was  speaking  of  ^  the  question  ^vhether  a 
handful  of  the  clergy  are  or  are  not  engaged  in  an  utterly  hopeless  and 
visionary  effort  to  Romanize  the  Church  and  people  of  England;' 

'At  no  time  since  the  bloody  reign  of  Mary  has  such  a  scheme  been  possible.  But  if  it 
had  been  possible  in  the  seventeenth  or  eighteenth  centuries,  it  would  still  have  become  im- 
possible in  the  nineteenth :  when  Rome  has  substituted  for  the  proud  boast  of  semper  eadem 
a  policy  of  violence  and  change  in  faith  ;  when  she  has  refurbished  and  paraded  anew  every 
rusty  tool  she  was  fondly  thought  to  have  disused ;  when  no  one  can  become  her  convert 
without  renouncing  his  moral  and  mental  freedom,  and  placing  his  civil  loyalty  and  duty  at 


10  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

the  mercy  of  another ;  and  when  she  has  equally  repudiated  modern  thought  and  ancient 
history.'^ 

Had  I  been,  when  I  wrote  this  passage,  as  I  now  am,  addressing 
myself  in  considerable  measure  to  my  lloman  Catholic  fellow-coun- 
trymen, I  should  have  striven  to  avoid  the  seeming  roughness  of  some 
of  these  expressions ;  but  as  the  question  is  now  about  their  substance, 
from  w^hich  I  am  not  in  any  particular  disposed  to  recede,  any  attempt 
to  recast  their  general  form  would  probably  mislead.  I  proceed,  then, 
to  deal  w^ith  them  on  their  merits. 

More  than  one  friend  of  mine  among  those  who  have  been  led  to 
join  the  Roman  Catholic  communion  has  made  this  passage  the  sub- 
ject, more  or  less,  of  expostulation.  Now,  in  my  opinion,  the  asser- 
tions which  it  makes  are,  as  coming  from  a  layman  who  has  spent  most 
and  the  best  years  of  his  life  in  the  observation  and  practice  of  poli- 
tics, not  aggressi^^,  but  defensive. 

It  is  neither  the  abettors  of  the  Papal  Chair,  nor  any  one  who,  how- 
ever far  from  being  an  abettor  of  the  Papal  Chair,  actually  writes 
from  a  Papal  point  of  view,  that  has  a  right  to  remonstrate  with  the 
world  at  large ;  but  it  is  the  world  at  large,  on  the  contiary,  that  lias 
the  fullest  right  to  remonstrate,  first,  with  his  Holiness;  secondly,  with 
those  who  share  his  proceedings ;  thirdly,  even  with  such  as  passively 
allow  and  accept  them. 

I,  therefore,  as  one  of  the  world  at  large,  propose  to  expostulate  in 
my  turn.  I  shall  strive  to  show  to  such  of  my  Poman  Catholic  fellow- 
subjects  as  may  kindly  give  me  a  hearing  that,  after  the  singular  steps 
which  the  authorities  of  their  Church  have  in  these  last  years  thought 
fit  to  take,  the  people  of  this  country,  who  fully  believe  in  their  loyal- 
ty, are  entitled,  on  purely  civil  grounds,  to  expect  from  them  some  dec- 
laration or  manifestation  of  opinion  in  reply  to  that  ecclesiastical  party 
in  their  Church  who  have  laid  down,  in  their  name,  principles  adverse* 
to  the  purity  and  integrity  of  civil  allegiance. 

Undoubtedly  my  allegations  are  of  great  breadth.  Such  broad  alle- 
gations require  a  broad  and  a  deep  foundation.  The  first  question 
which  they  raise  is,  Are  tliey,  as  to  the  material  part  of  them,  true  ? 
But  even  their  truth  might  not  suffice  to  show  that  their  publication 

'  Contemporary  Review,  October,  1874,  p.  G74. 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  H 

was  opportune.  The  second  question,  then,  which  they  raise  is.  Are 
they,  for  any  practical  purpose,  material  ?  And  there  is  yet  a  third, 
though  a  minor  question,  wliich  arises  out  of  the  propositions  in  con- 
nection with  their  authorship,  Were  they  suitable  to  be  set  forth  by 
the  present  writer  ? 

To  these  three  questions  I  will  now  set  myself  to  reply.  And  the 
matter  of  my  reply  will,  as  I  conceive,  constitute  and  convey  an  appeal 
to  tlie  understandings  of  my  Roman  Catholic  fellow-countrymen  which 
1  trust  that,  at  the  least,  some  among  them  may  deem  not  altogether 
unworthy  of  their  consideration. 

From  the  language  used  by  some  of  the  organs  of  Roman  Catholic 
opinion,  it  is,  I  am  afraid,  plain  that  in  some  quarters  they  have  given 
deep  offense.  Displeasure,  indignation,  even  fury,  might  be  said  to 
mark  the  language  which  in  the  heat  of  the  moment  has  been  expressed 
here  and  there.  They  have  been  hastily  treated  as  an  attack  made 
upon  Roman  Catholics  generally — nay,  as  an  insult  offered  them.  It 
is  obvious  to  reply  that  of  Roman  Catholics  generally  they  state  noth^ 
ing.  Together  with  a  reference  to  'converts,'  of  which  I  shall  say 
more,  they  constitute  generally  a  free  and  strong  animadversion  on  the 
conduct  of  the  Papal  Chair,  and  of  its  advisers  and  abettors.  If  I  am 
told  that  he  who  animadverts  upon  these  assails  thereby,  or  insults,  Ro- 
man Catholics  at  large,  who  do  not  choose  their  ecclesiastical  rulers, 
and  are  not  recognized  as  having  any  voice  in  the  government  of  their 
Church,  I  can  not  be  bound  by  or  accept  a  proposition  w^hicli  seems  to 
me  to  be  so  little  in  accordance  with  reason. 

Before  all  things,  however,  I  should  desire  it  to  be  understood  that, 
in  the  remarks  now  offered,  I  desire  to  eschew  not  only  religious  big- 
otry, but  likewise  theological  controversy.  Indeed,  with  theology,  ex- 
cept in  its  civil  bearing — with  theology  as  such — I  have  here  nothing 
whatever  to  do.  But  it  is  the  peculiarity  of  Roman  theology  that,  by 
thrusting  itself  into  the  temporal  domain,  it  naturally,  and  even  neces- 
sarily, comes  to  be  a  frequent  theme  of  political  discussion.  To  quiet- ^ 
minded  Roman  Catholics  it  must  be  a  subject  of  infinite  annoyance 
that  their  religion  is,  on  this  ground  more  than  any  other,  the  subject 
of  criticism;  more  than  any  other  the  occasion  of  conflicts  with  the 
State  and  of  civil  disquietude.  I  feel  sincerely  how  much  hardship 
their  case  entails.     But  this  hardship  is  brought  upon  them  altogether 


12  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

by  the  conduct  of  the  authorities  of  their  own  Churcli.  Why  did  the- 
ology enter  so  largely  into  the  debates  of  Parliament  on  Koman  Cath- 
olic Emancipation  ?  Certainly  not  because  our  statesmen  and  debaters 
of  fifty  years  ago  had  an  abstract  love  of  such  controversies,  but  be- 
cause it  was  extensively  believed  that  tlie  Pope  of  Pome  had  been  and 
was  a  trespasser  upon  ground  which  belonged  to  the  civil  authority, 
and  that  he  affected  to  determine  by  spiritual  prerogative  questions  of 
tlie  civil  sphere.  This  fact,  if  fact  it  be,  and  not  the  truth  or  falsehood, 
the  reasonableness  or  unreasonableness,  of  any  article  of  purely  re- 
ligious belief,  is  tlie  w^iole  and  sole  cause  of  the  mischief.  To  this 
fact,  and  to  this  fact  alone,  my  language  is  referable ;  but  for  this  fact 
it  would  have  been  neither  my  duty  nor  my  desire  to  use  it.  All  other 
Christian  bodies  are  content  w^ith  freedom  in  their  own  religious  do- 
main. Orientals,  Lutherans,  Calvinists,  Presbyterians,  Episcopalians, 
Nonconformists,  one  and  all,  in  the  present  day,  contentedly  and  thank- 
fully accept  the  benefits  of  civil  order ;  never  pretend  that  the  State  is 
not  its  own  master ;  make  no  religious  claims  to  temporal  possessions 
or  advantages ;  and,  consequently,  never  are  in  perilous  collision  with 
the  State.  Nay  more,  even  so  I  believe  it  is  with  the  mass  of  Roman 
Catholics  individually.  But  not  so  with  the  leaders  of  their  Church, 
or  with  those  who  take  pride  in  following  the  leaders.  Indeed,  this 
has  been  made  matter  of  boast : 

'  There  is  not  another  Church  so  called  [than  the  Roman],  nor  any  community  professing 
to  be  a  Church,  which  does  not  submit,  or  obey,  or  hold  its  peace  when  the  civil  governors 
of  the  world  command.' — The  Present  Crisis  of  the  Holy  See,  by  H.  E.  Manning,  D.D. 
London,  1861,  p.  75. 

The  Pome  of  the  Middle  Ages  claimed  universal  monarchy.  The 
modern  Church  of  Pome  has  abandoned  nothing,  retracted  notliing. 
Is  that  all  ?  Far  from  it.  By  condemning  (as  will  be  seen)  those  who, 
like  Bishop  Doyle  in  1826,^  charge  the  mediaeval  Popes  with  aggression, 
she  unconditionally,  even  if  covertly,  maintains  w^iat  the  mediaeval 
Popes  maintained.  But  even  this  is  not  the  worst.  The  worst  by  far  is 
tliat  whereas  in  the  national  Churches  and  communities  of  the  Middle 
Ages  there  was  a  brisk,  vigorous,  and  constant  opposition  to  these  out- 
rageous claims — an  opposition  ^vhicli  stoutly  asserted  its  own  orthodoxy, 

*  Lords'  Committee,  March  18, 1820.    Report,  p.  190. 


IN  THEIR  BEAEING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  13 

which  always  caused  itself  to  be  respected,  and  which  even  sometimes 
gained  the  npper  hand,  now,  in  this  nineteenth  century  of  ours,  and 
while  it  is  growing  old,  this  same  opposition  has  been  put  out  of  court, 
and  judicially  extinguished  within  the  Papal  Church,  by  the  recent  de- 
crees of  the  Vatican.  And  it  is  impossible  for  persons  accepting  those 
decrees  justly  to  complain  when  such  documents  are  subjected  in  good 
faith  to  a  strict  examination  as  respects  their  compatibility  with  civil 
right  and  the  obedience  of  subjects. 

In  defending  my  language,  I  shall  carefully  mark  its  limits.  But 
all  defense  is  reassertion,  which  properly  requires  a  deliberate  recon- 
sideration;  and  no  man  who  thus  reconsiders  should  scruple,  if  he  find 
so  much  as  a  word  tliat  may  convey  a  false  impression,  to  amend  it. 
Exactness  in  stating  truth  according  to  the  measure  of  our  intelligence 
is  an  indispensable  condition  of  justice  and  of  a  title  to  be  heard. 

My  propositions,  then,  as  they  stood,  are  these : 

1.  That  'Eome  has  substituted  for  the  proud  boast  of  senvper  eadem 
a  policy  of  violence  and  change  in  faith.' 

2.  That  she  has  refurbished  and  paraded  anew  every  rusty  tool  she 
was  fondly  thought  to  have  disused. 

3.  That  no  one  can  now  become  her  convert  without  renouncing  his 
moral  and  mental  freedom,  and  placing  his  civil  loyalty  and  duty  at 
the  mercy  of  another. 

4.  That  she  ('Eome')  has  equally  repudiated  modern  thought  and 
ancient  history. 

II.  The  Fiest  and  the  Fourth  Propositions. 

Of  the  first  and  fourth  of  these  propositions  I  shall  dispose  rather 
summarily,  as  they  appear  to  belong  to  the  theological  domain.  They 
refer  to  a  fact,  and  they  record  an  opinion.  One  fact  to  which  they 
refer  is  this:  that,  in  days  within  my  memory,  the  constant,  favorite, 
and  imposing  argument  of  Eoman  controversialists  was  the  unbroken 
and  absolute  identity  in  belief  of  the  Poman  Church  from  the  days 
of  our  Saviour  until  now.  No  one  who  has  at  all  followed  the  course 
of  this  literature  during  the  last  forty  years  can  fail  to  be  sensible  of 
the  change  in  its  present  tenor.  More  and  more  have  the  assertions 
of  continuous  uniformity  of  doctrine  receded  into  scarcely  penetrable 
shadow.    More  and  more  have  another  series  of  assertions,  of  a  liv' 


14:  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

ing  authority,  ever  ready  to  open,  adopt,  and  shape  Christian  doctrine 
according  to  the  times,  taken  their  place.  Without  discussing  the 
abstract  compatibility  of  these  lines  of  argument,  I  note  two  of  the 
immense  practical  differences  between  them.  In  the  first,  the  office 
claimed  by  the  Church  is  principally  that  of  a  w^itness  to  facts ;  in  the 
second,  principally  that  of  a  judge,  if  not  a  revealer,  of  doctrine.  In 
the  first,  the  processes  which  the  Church  undertakes  are  subject  to  a 
constant  challenge  and  appeal  to  history ;  in  the  second,  no  amount  of 
historical  testimony  can  avail  against  the  unmeasured  power  of  the 
theory  of  development.  Most  important,  most  pregnant  considerations, 
these,  at  least  for  two  classes  of  persons :  for  those  who  think  that  ex- 
aggerated doctrines  of  Church  power  are  among  the  real  and  sei-ions 
dangers  of  the  age ;  and  for  those  who  think  that  against  all  forms, 
both  of  superstition  and  of  unbelief,  one  main  preservative  is  to  be 
found  in  maintaining  tlie  truth  and  authority  of  history,  and  the  ines- 
timable value  of  the  historic  spirit. 

So  much  for  the  fact;  as  for  the  opinion  that  the  recent  Papal  de- 
crees are  at  war  witli  modern  thought,  and  that,  purporting  to  enlarge 
the  necessary  creed  of  Christendom,  they  involve  a  violent  breach  with 
history,  this  is  a  matter  unfit  for  me  to  discuss,  as  it  is  a  question  of 
Divinity,  but  not  unfit  for  me  to  have  mentioned  in  my  article,  since 
the  opinion  given  there  is  the  opinion  of  those  with  whom  I  was 
endeavoring  to  reason,  namely,  the  great  majority  of  the  British 
public. 

If  it  is  thought  that  the  word  violence  was  open  to  exception,  I  re- 
gret I  can  not  give  it  up.  The  justification  of  the  ancient  definitions 
of  the  Church,  which  have  endured  the  storms  of  1500  years,  was  to 
be  found  in  this,  that  they  were  not  arbitrary  or  willful,  but  that  they 
wholly  sprang  from  and  related  to  theories  rampant  at  the  time,  and 
regarded  as  menacing  to  Christian  belief.  Even  the  Canons  of  the 
Council  of  Trent  have  in  the  main  this  amount,  apart  from  their  mat- 
ter, of  presumptive  w^arrant.  But  the  decrees  of  the  present  perilous 
Pontificate  have  been  passed  to  favor  and  precipitate  prevailing  cur- 
rents of  opinion  in  the  ecclesiastical  world  of  Rome.  The  growth  of 
what  is  often  termed  among  Protestants  Mariolatry,  and  of  belief  in 
Papal  Infallibility,  was  notoriously  advancing,  but  it  seems  -not  fast 
enough  to  satisfy  the  dominant  party.     To  aim  the  deadly  blows  of 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  15 

18,54:^  and  18T0  at  the  old  historic,  scientific,  and  moderate  school,  was 
surely  an  act  of  violence ;  and  with  this  censure  the  proceeding  of  1870 
has  actually  been  visited  by  the  first  living  theologian  now  within  the 
Roman  communion — I  mean  Dr.  John  Henry  Xewman,  who  has  used 
these  significant  words,  among  others :  '  Why  should  an  aggressive  and 
insolent  faction  be  allowed  to  make  the  heart  of  tlie  just  sad,  whom 
the  Lord  hath  not  made  sorrowful  V  ^ 

III.  The  Second  Peoposition. 

I  take  next  my  second  proposition :  that  Rome  has  refurbished  and 
paraded  anew  every  rusty  tool  she  was  fondly  thought  to  have  disused. 

Is  this,  tlien,  a  fact,  or  is  it  not  ? 

I  must  assume  that  it  is  denied ;  and  therefore  I  can  not  wholly  ptiss 
by  the  work  of  proof.  But  I  will  state,  in  the  fewest  possible  words 
and  with  references,  a  few  propositions,  all  the  holders  of  which  have 
been  condemned  by  the  See  of  Rome  during  my  own  generation,  and 
especially  within  the  last  twelve  or  fifteen  years.  And,  in  order  that  I 
may  do  nothing  towar(Js  importing  passion  into  what  is  matter  of  pure 
argument,  I  will  avoid  citing  any  of  the  fearfully  energetic  epithets  in 
which  the  condemnations  are  sometimes  clothed. 

1.  Those  who  maintain  the  liberty  of  the  Press.  Encyclical  Letter 
of  Pope  Gregory  XVI.,  in  1831 ;  and  of  Pope  Pius  IX.,  in  1864. 

2.  Or  the  liberty  of  conscience  and  of  worship.  Encyclical  of  Pius 
IX.,  December  8, 1864. 

3.  Or  the  liberty  of  speech.  '  Syllabus '  of  March  18, 1861.  Prop. 
Ixxix.     Encyclical  of  Pope  Pius  IX.,  December  8, 1864. 

4.  Or  who  contend  that  Papal  judgments  and  decrees  may,  without 
sin,  be  disobeyed  or  differed  from,  unless  they  treat  of  the  rules  {dog- 
mata) of  faith  or  morals.     Ibid. 

6.  Or  who  assign  to  the  State  the  power  of  defining  the  civil  rights 
{jura)  and  province  of  the  Church.  '  Syllabus '  of  Pope  Pius  IX., 
March  8, 1861.     Ibid.     Prop.  xix. 

6.  Or  who  hold  that  Roman  Pontiffs  and  CEcumenical  Councils  have 


'  Decree  of  the  Immaculate  Conception. 

^  See  the  remarkable  letter  of  Dr.  Newman  to  Bishop  Ullathorne,  in  The  Guardian  of 
April  6, 1870. 


16  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

transgressed  tlie  limits  of  their  power,  and  usurped  the  rights  of  princes. 
Ibid.    Prop,  xxiii. 

(It  inust  he  home  in  mind  that  ^(Ecumenical  Councils'^  here  mean 
Roman  Councils  not  recognized  hy  the  rest  of  the  Church.  The 
Councils  of  the  early  Church  did  not  interfere  with  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  civil  2^ower,) 

7.  Or  that  the  Church  may  not  employ  force.  {Ecclesia  vis  inferen- 
d(E potestatem  non  hahet^    ^Syllabus.'     Prop.  xxiv. 

8.  Or  that  power,  not  inherent  in  the  office  of  the  Episcopate,  bnt 
granted  to  it  by  the  civil  authority,  may  be  withdrawn  from  it  at  the 
discretion  of  that  autliority.     Ibid.     Prop.  xxv. 

9.  Or  that  the  {immimitas)  civil  immunity  of  the  Church  and  its 
ministers  depends  upon  civil  right.     Ibid.     Prop.  xxx. 

10.  Or  that  in  the  conflict  of  laws,  civil  and  ecclesiastical,  the  civil 
law  should  prevail.     Ibid.     Prop.  xlii. 

11.  Or  that  any  method  of  instruction  of  youth,  solely  secular,  may 
be  approved.     Ibid.     Prop,  xlviii. 

12.  Or  that  knowledge  of  things  philosophical  and  civil  may  and 
should  decline  to  be  guided  by  divine  and  ecclesiastical  authority. 
Ibid.     Prop.  Ivii. 

13.  Or  that  marriage  is  not  in  its  essence  a  sacrament.  Ibid.  Prop.  Ixvi. 

14.  Or  that  marriage  not  sacramentally  contracted  {si  sacrament um 
excludatur)  has  a  binding  force.     Ibid.     Prop.  Ixxiii. 

15.  Or  that  the  abolition  of  the  temporal  power  of  the  Popedom 
would  be  highly  advantageous  to  the  Church.  Ibid.  Prop.  Ixxvi.  Also 
Prop.  Ixx. 

16.  Or  that  any  other  religion  than  the  Eoman  religion  may  be  es- 
tablished by  a  State.     Ibid.     Prop.  Ixxvii. 

17.  Or  that  in  '  countries  called  Catholic'  the  free  exercise  of  other 
religions  may  laudably  be  allowed.     '  Syllabus.'     Prop.  Ixxviii. 

18.  Or  that  the  Roman  Pontiff  ought  to  come  to  terms  with  progress, 
liberalism,  and  modern  civilization.     Ibid.     Prop.  Ixxx.^ 

This  list  is  now,  perhaps,  sufficiently  extended,  although  I  have  as 
yet  not  touched  the  decrees  of  1870.  But,  before  quitting  it,  I  must 
ofPej  three  observations  on  what  it  contains. 

*  For  the  original  passages  from  the  Encyclical  and  Syllabus  of  Pius  IX.,  see  Appendix  A. 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  I7 

Firstly.  I  do  not  place  all  the  propositions  in  one  and  the  same 
category;  for  there  are  a  portion  of  them  which,  as  far  as  I  can  judge, 
might,  by  the  combined  aid  of  favorable  construction  and  vigorous  ex- 
planation, be  brought  within  bounds.  And  I  hold  that  favorable  con- 
struction of  the  terms  used  in  controversies  is  the  riglit  general  rule. 
But  this  can  only  be  so  when  construction  is  an  open  question.  Wiien 
the  author  of  certain  propositions  claims,  as  .in  the  case  before  us,  a 
sole  and  unlimited  power  to  interpret  them  in  such  manner  and  by 
such  rules  as  he  may  from  time  to  time  think  lit,  the  only  defense 
for  all  others  concerned  is  at  once  to  judge  for  tliemselves  how 
much  of  unreason  or  of  mischief  the  words,  naturally  understood, 
may  contain. 

Secondly.  It  may  appear,  upon  a  hasty  perusal,  that,  neither  the  in- 
fliction of  penalty  in  life,  limb,  liberty,  or  goods,  on  disobedient  mem- 
bers of  the  Christian  Church,  nor  the  title  to  depose  sovereigns  and  re- 
lease subjects  from  their  allegiance,  with  all  its  revolting  consequences, 
has  been  here  reaffirmed.  In  terms,  there  is  no  mention  of  them; 
but  in  the  substance  of  the  propositions,  I  grie\-e  to  say,  they  are  be- 
yond doubt  included.  For  it  is  notorious  that  they  have  been  declared 
and  decreed  by  '  Eome' — that  is  to  say,  by  Popes  and  Papal  Councils ; 
and  the  stringent  condemnations  of  the  Syllabus  include  all  those  who 
hold  that  Popes  and  Papal  Councils  (declared  oecumenical)  have  trans- 
gressed the  just  limits  of  their  power,  or  usurped  the  rights  of  princes. 
What  have  been  their  opinions  and  decrees  about  persecution  I  need 
hardly  say,  and  indeed  the  right  to  employ  physical  force  is  even  here 
undisguisedly  claimed  (No.  7). 

Even  while  I  am  writing,  I  am  reminded,  from  an  unquestionable 
source,  of  the  words  of  Pope  Pius  IX.  himself  on  the  deposing  power. 
I  add  only  a  few  italics;  the  w^ords  appear  as  given  in  a  translation, 
without  the  original : 

'The  present  Pontiff  used  these  words  in  replying  to  the  address  from  the  "  Academia  of 
the  Catholic  Religion"  (July  21, 1873)  : 

'  "  There  are  many  errors  regarding  the  Infallibility  ;  but  the  most  malicious  of  all  is  that 
which  includes,  in  that  dogma,  the  right  of  deposing  sovereigns,  and  declaring  the  people  no 
longer  bound  by  the  obligation  of  fidelity.  This  right  has  now  and  again,  in  critical  circum- 
stances, been  exercised  by  the  Pontiffs ;  but  it  has  nothing  to  do  with  Papal  Infallibility. 
Its  origin  was  not  the  infallibility,  but  the  authority  of  the  Pope.  This  authority,  in  accord- 
ance with  public  right,  which  was  then  vigorous,  and  with  the  acquiescence  of  all  Christian 
nations,  who  reverenced  in  the  Pope  the  supreme  Judge  of  the  Christian  Commonwealth, 

B 


^\5  «Anp 
(   J  ^rIVERSITY 


CALiFOn!>^        THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

extended  so  far  as.  io  pass  judgment  j  even  in  civil  affairs,  on  the  acts  of  Princes  and  of  Na- 
tions." '  1  . 

Lastly.  I  must  observe  tliat  these  are  not  mere  opinions  of  the  Popo 
himself,  nor  even  are  they  opinions  which  he  might  paternally  recom- 
mend to  the  pious  consideration  of  the  faithful.  With  the  promulga- 
tion of  his  opinions  is  unhappily  combined,  in  the  Encyclical  Letter, 
which  virtually,  though  not  expressly,  includes  the  whole,  a  command 
to  all  his  spiritual  children  (from  which  command  we  the  disobedient 
children  are  in  no  way  excluded)  to  hold  them.- 

*  Itaque  omnes  et  singulas  pravas  opiniones  et  doctrinas  singillatim  hisce  literis  commemo- 
ratas  auctoritate  nostra  Apostolica  reprobamus,  proscribimus,  atque,  damnamus  ;  easque  ab 
omnibus  Catholicai  Ecclesia;  filiis  veluti  reprobatas,  proscriptas,  atque  damnatas  omnino  ha- 
beri  volumus  et  mandamus.' — Encycl.,  Dec.  8, 1864. 

And  the  decrees  of  1870  will  presently  show  us  what  they  establish 
as  the  binding  force  of  the  mandate  thus  conveyed  to  the  Christian 
world. 

ly.  The  Third  Peoposition. 

I  now  pass  to  the  operation  of  these  extraordinary  declarations  on 
personal  or  private  duty. 

When  the  cup  of  endurance,  which  had  so  long  been  filling,  began,  with 
the  Council  of  the  Vatican  in  1870,  to  overflow,  the  most  famous  and 
learned  living  theologian  of  the  Eoman  communion,  Dr.  von  Dcillinger, 
long  the  foremost  champion  of  his  Church,  refused  compliance,  and  sub- 
mitted, with  his  tamper  undisturbed  and  his  freedom  unimpaired,  to  the 
extreme  and  most  painful  penalty  of  excommunication.  With  him  many 
of  the  most  learned  and  respected  theologians  of  the  Eoman  commun- 
ion in  Germany  underwent  the  same  sentence.  The  very  few  who 
elsewhere  (I  do  not  speak  of  Switzerland)  suffered  in  like  manner  de- 
serve an  admiration  rising  in  proportion  to  their  fewness.  It  seems  as 
though  Germany,  from  which  Luther  blew  the  mighty  trumpet  that 
even  now  echoes  through  the  land,  still  retained  her  primacy  in  the  do- 
main of  conscience,  still  supplied  the  centitria  prcerogativa  of  the  great . 
comitia  of  the  world. 

^  Civilization  and  the  See  of  Rome.  By  Lord  Robert  Montagu.  Dublin,  1874.  A  lecture 
delivered  under  the  auspices  of  the  Catholic  Union  of  Ireland.  I  have  a  little  misgiving  abcut 
the  version,  but  not  of  a  nature  to  affect  the  substance. 


IN  THEIR  BEAEING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  19 

But  let  no  man  wonder  or  complain.     Without  imputi-ng  to  any  one 
the  moral  murder — for  such  it  is — of  stifling  conscience  and  conviction, 
I  for  one  can  not  be  surprised  that  the  fermentation  which  is  working 
through  the  mind  of  the  Latin  Church  has  as  vet  (elsewhere  than  in 
Germany)  but  in  few  instances  come  to  the  surface.     By  the  mass  of 
mankind  it  is  morally  impossible  that  questions  such  as  these  can  be 
adequately  examined ;  so  it  ever  has  been,  and  so  in  the  main  it  will 
continue,  until  the  principles  of  manufacturing  machinery  shall  have 
been  applied,  and  with  analogous  results,  to  intellectual  and  moral  proc- 
esses.    Followers  they  are  and  must  be,  and  in  a  certain  sense  .ought 
to  be.    But  what  as  to  the  leaders  of  society,  the  men  of  education  and 
of  leisure  ?    I  w^ill  try  to  suggest  some  answer  in  few  words.    A  change 
of  religious  profession  is  under  all  circumstances  a  great  and  awful 
tiling.^    Much  more  is  the  question,  however,  between  conflicting  or  ap- 
parently conflicting  duties  arduous  when  the  religion  of  a  man  has 
been  changed  for  him,  over  his  head,  and  w^ithout  the  very  least  of  his 
participation.     Far  be  it,  then,  from  me  to  make  any  Roman  Catholic, 
except  the  great  hierarchic  Power,  and  those  who  have  egged  it  on,  re- 
sponsible for  the  portentous  proceedings  which  we  have  witnessed.    My 
conviction  is  that,  even  of  those  who  may  not  shake  off  the  yoke,  mul- 
titudes will  vindicate  at  any  rate  their  loyalty  at  the  expense  of  the  con- 
sistency, which  perhaps  in  diflScult  matters  of  religion  few  among  us 
perfectly  maintain.     But  this  belongs  to  the  future ;  for  tlie  present, 
nothing  could  in  my  opinion  be  more  unjust  than  to  hold  the  members, 
of  the  Eoman  Church  in  general  already  responsible  for  the  recent 
innovations.    The  duty  of  observers,  who  think  the  claims  involved  in 
the^e  decrees  arrogant  and  false,  and  such  as  not  even  impotence,  real 
or  supposed,  ought  to  shield  from  criticism,  is  frankly  to  state  the  case, 
and,  by  way  of  friendly  challenge,  to  entreat  their  Eoman  Catholic 
fellow-countrymen  to  replace  themselves  in  the  position  which  five- 
and-forty  years  ago  this  nation,  by  the  voice  and  action  of  its  Parlia- 
ment, declared  its  belief  that  they  held. 

Upon  a  strict  re-examination  of  the  language  as  apart  fron>  the  sub- 
stance of  my  fourth  proposition,  I  find  it  faulty,  inasmuch  as  it  seems 
to  imply  that  a  'convert'  now  joining  the  Papal  Church  not  only  gives 
up  certain  rights  and  duties  of  freedom,  but  surrenders  them  by  a  con- 
scious and  deliberate  act.    What  I  have  less  accurately  said  that  he  re- 


20  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

noil  need,  I  might  have  more  accurately  said  that  he  forfeited.  To  speak 
strictly,  the  claim  now  made  upon  him  by  the  authority  which  he 
solemnly  and  with  the  highest  responsibility  acknowledges  requires 
him  to  surrender  his  mental  and  moral  freedom,  and  to  place  his  loyal- 
ty and  civil  duty  at  the  mercy  of  another.  There  may  have  been,  and 
may  be,  persons  who  in  their  sanguine  trust  will  not  shrink  from  this 
result,  and  will  console  themselves  with  the  notion  that  their  loyalty 
and  civil  duty  are  to  be  committed  to  the  custody  of  one  much  wiser 
than  tliemselves.  But  I  am  sure  that  there  are  also  ^converts'  who, 
when  'they  perceive,  will  by  w^ord  and  act  reject  the  consequence 
which  relentless  logic  draws  for  them.  If,  however,  my  proposition  be 
true,  there  is  no  escape  from  the  dilemma.  Is  it,  then,  true,  or  is  it  not 
true,  that  Rome  requires  a  convert  who  now  joins  her  to  forfeit  his 
moral  and  mental  freedom,  and  to  place  his  loyalty  and  civil  duty  at 
the  mercy  of  another  ? 

In  order  to  place  this  matter  in  as  clear  a  light  as  I  can,  it  will  be 
necessary  to  go  back  a  little  upon  our  recent  histor3\ 

A  century  ago  we  began  to  relax  that  system  of  penal  laws  against 
Roman  Catholics,  at  once  pettifogging,  base,  and  cruel,  which  Mr. 
Burke  has  scathed  and  blasted  with  his  immortal  eloquence. 

When  this  process  had  reached  the  point  at  which  the  question  was 
whether  they  should  be  admitted  into  Parliament,  there  arose  a  great 
and  prolonged  national  controversy ;  and  some  men,  who  at  no  time  of 
their  lives  were  narrow-minded,  such  as  Sir  Robert  Peel,  the  Minister, 
resisted  the  concession.  The  arguments  in  its  favor  were  obvious  and 
strong,  and  they  ultimately  prevailed.  But  the  strength  of  the  oppos- 
ing party  had  lain  in  the  allegation  that,  from  the  nature  and  claims  of 
the  Papal  power,  it  was  not  possible  for  the  consistent  Roman  Catho- 
lic to  pay  to  the  Crown  of  this  country  an  entire  allegiance,  and  that 
the  admission  of  persons  thus  self-disabled  to  Parliament  was  incon- 
sistent with  the  safety  of  the  State  and  nation,  which  had  not  very  long 
before,  it  may  be  observed,  emerged  from  a  struggle  for  existence. 

An  answer  to  this  argument  was  indispensable ;  and  it  was  supplied 
mainly  from  two  sources.     The  Josephine  laws,^  then  still  subsisting 


^  See  the  work  of  Count  dal  Pozzo  on  the  Austrian  Ecclesiastical  Law.     London,  Mur- 
ray, 1827.     The  Leopoldine  Laws  in  Tuscany  may  also  be  mentioned. 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  21 

ill  the  Austrian  Empire,  and  the  arrangements  which  had  been  made 
after  the  peace  of  1815  by  Prussia  and  the  German  States  with  Pius 
VII.  and  Gonsalvi,  proved  that  the  Papal  Court  could  submit  to  cir- 
cumstances, and  could  allow  material  restraints  even  upon  the  exercise 
of  its  ecclesiastical  prerogatives.  Here,  then,  was  a  reply  in  the  sense 
of  the  phrase  solvitur  ainhiilando.  Much  information  of  this  class 
was  collected  for  the  information  of  Parliament  and  the  country.^ 
But  there  were  also  measures  taken  to  learn,  from  the  highest  Roman 
Catholic  authorities  of  this  country,  what  was  the  exact  situation  of  the 
members  of  that  communion  wdth  respect  to  some  of  the  better  known 
exorbitancies  of  Papal  assumption.  Did  the  Pope  claim  any  temporal 
jurisdiction  ?  Did  he  still  pretend  to  the  exercise  of  a  power  to  depose 
kings,  release  subjects  from  their  allegiance,  and  incite  them  to  revolt  ? 
Was  faith  to  be  kept  with  heretics?  Did  the  Church  still  teach  the 
doctrines  of  persecution  ?  Now,  to  no  one  of  these  questions  could  the 
answer  really  be  of  the  smallest  immediate  moment  to  this  powerful 
and  solidly  compacted  kingdom.  They  were  topics  selected  by  way  of 
sample ;  and  the  intention  was  to  elicit  declarations  showing  generally 
that  the  fangs  of  the  mediaeval  Popedom  had  been  drawn,  and  its  claws 
torn  away ;  that  the  Roman  system,  however  strict  in  its  dogma,  was 
perfectly  compatible  w^ith  civil  liberty,  and  with  the  institutions  of  a 
free  State  moulded  on  a  different  religious  basis  from  its  own. 

Answers  in  abundance  were  obtained,  tending  to  show  that  the  doc- 
trines of  deposition  and  persecution,  of  keeping  no  faith  with  heretics, 
and  of  universal  dominion,  were  obsolete  beyond  revival ;  that  every 
assurance  could  be  given  .respecting  them,  except  such  as  required  the 
sjiame  of  a  formal  retractation ;  that  they  were  in  effect  mere  bugbeai^s, 
unworthy  to  be  taken  into  account  by  a  nation  which  prided  itself  on 
being  made  up  of  practical  men. 

But  it  was  unquestionably  felt  that  something  more  than  the  renun- 
ciation of  these  particular  opinions  was  necessary  in  order  to  secure  the 
full  concession  of  civil  rights  to  Roman  Catholics.  As  to  their  indi- 
vidual loyalty,  a  State  disposed  to  generous  or  candid  interpretation 

^  See  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  appointed  to  Report  the  Nature  and  Substance  of 
the  Laivs  and  Ordinances  existing  in  Foreign  States  respecting  the  Regulation  of  their  Roman 
Catholic  Subjects  in  Ecclesiastical  Matters^  and  their  Intercourse  with  the  See  of  Rome,  or 
any  other  Foreign  Ecclesiastical  Jurisdiction.  Printed  for  the  House  of  Commons  in  181S 
and  1817.     Reprinted  185  L 


22  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

had  110  reason  to  be  uneasy.  It  was  only  with  regard  to  requisitions 
which  might  be  made  on  them  from  another  quarter  that  apprehension 
could  exist.  It  was  reasonable  that  England  should  desire  to  know 
not  only  what  the  Pope^  might  do  for  himself,  but  to  what  demands, 
by  the  Constitution  of  their  Church,  they  were  liable ;  and  how  far  it 
was  possible  that  such  demands  could  touch  their  civil  duty.  The 
t^ieory  which  placed  every  human  being,  in  things  spiritual  and  things 
temporal,  at  the  feet  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  had  not  been  an  idolum 
sjpecus,  a  mere  theory  of  the  chamber.  Brain  power  never  surpassed 
in  the  political  history  of  the  world  had  been  devoted  for  centuries  to 
the  single  purpose  of  working  it  into  the  practice  of  Christendom;  had 
in  the  West  achieved  for  an  impossible  problem  a  partial  success ;  and 
had  in  the  East  punished  the  obstinate  independence  of  the  Church  by 
that  Latin  conquest  of  Constantinople  which  effectually  prepared  the 
way  for  the  downfall  of  the  Eastern  Empire  and  tlie  establishment  of 
the  Turks  in  Europe.  What  was  really  material  therefore  was,  not 
whether  the  Papal  Chair  laid  claim  to  this  or  that  particular  power, 
but  whether  it  laid  claim  to  some  power  that  included  them  all,  and 
whether  that  claim  had  received  such  sanction  from  the  authorities  of 
the  Latin  Church  that  there  remained  within  her  borders  absolutely 
no  tenable  standing-ground  from  which  war  against  it  could  be  main- 
tained. Did  the  Pope,  then,  claim  infallibility  ?  Or  did  he,  eitlier 
without  infallibility  or  with  it  (and  if  with  it  so  much  the  worse), 
claim  a  universal  obedience  from  his  flock?  And  were  these  claims, 
either  or  both,  affirmed  in  his  Church  by  authority  w^hich  even  the 
least  Papal  of  the  members  of  that  Church  must  admit  to  be  binding 
upon  conscience  ? 

The  first  two  of  these  questions  were  covered  by  the  third ;  and  well  it 
was  that  they  were  so  covered,  for  to  them  no  satisfactory  answer  could 
even  then  be  given.  The  Popes  had  kept  up,  with  comparatively  little 
intermission,  for  well-nigh  a  thousand  years  their  claim  to  dogmatic  in- 
fallibility ;  and  had,  at  periods  within  the  same  tract  of  time,  often 
enough  made,  and  never  retracted,  that  other  claim  which  is  theoretic- 


^  At  that  period  the  eminent  and  able  Bishop  Doyle  did  not  scruple  to  write  as  follows; 
'  We  are  taunted  with  the  proceedings  of  Popes.  What,  my  Lord,  have  we  Catholics  to  do 
with  the  proceedings  of  Popes,  or  why  should  we  be  made  accountable  for  them  T- — Essay  on 
the  Catholic  Claims.     To  Lord  Liverpool,  182G,  p.  HI. 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  ^3 

ally  less  but  practically  larger — their  claim  to  an  obedience  virtually 
universal  from  the  baptized  members  of  the  Church.  To  the  third 
question  it  was  fortunately  more  practicable  to  prescribe  a  satisfactory 
reply.  It  was  well  known  that,  in  the  days  of  its  glory  and  intellect- 
ual power,  the  great  Gallican  Church  had  not  only  not  admitted,  but 
had  denied  Papal  infallibility,  and  had  declared  that  the  local  laws 
and  usages  of  the  Church  could  not  be  set  aside  by  the  will  of  the 
Pontiff.  Nay,  further,  it  was  believed  that  in  the  main  these  had 
been,  down  to  the  close  of  the  last  century,  the  prevailing  opinions  of 
the  Cisalpine  Churche^  in  communion  with  Eome.  The  Council  of 
Constance  had  in  act  as  well  as  word  shown  that  the  Pope's  judgments, 
and  the  Pope  himself,  were  triable  by  the  assembled  representatives 
of  the  Christian  world.  And  the  Council  of  Trent,  notwithstanding 
the  predominance  in  it  of  Italian  and  Poman  influences,  if  it  had  not 
denied,  yet  had  not  afiirmed  either  proposition. 

All  that  remained  was  to  know  what  w^ere  the  sentiments  entertain- 
ed on  these  vital  points  by  the  leaders  and  guides  of  Roman  Catholic 
opinion  nearest  to  our  own  doors.  And  here  testimony  was  offered 
which  must  not  and  can  not  be  forgotten.  In  part,  this  was  the  testi- 
mony of  witnesses  before  the  Committee  of  the  House  of  Lords  in 
1825.  I  need  quote  two  answers  only,  given  by  the  Prelate  who  more 
than  any  other  represented  his  Church,  and  influenced  the  mind  of  this 
country  in  favor  of  concession  at  the  time,  namely.  Bishop  Doyle. 
He  w^as  asked  :^ 

'  In  what,  and  how  far,  does  the  Roman  Catholic  profess  to  obey  the  Pope  ?' 

He  replied  : 

'  The  Catholic  professes  to  obey  the  Pope  in  matters  whicL  Regard  his  -eligious  faith,  and  in 
those  matters  of  ecclesiastical  discipline  which  have  already  been  defined  by  the  competent 
authorities.' 

And  again : 

'  Does  that  justify  the  objection  that  is  made  to  Catholics  that  their  allegiance  is  divided  ?' 

*  I  do  not  think  it  does  in  any  way.    We  are  bound  to  obey  the  Pope  in  those  things  that  I 

have  already  mentioned.    But  our  obedience  to  the  law,  and  the  allegiance  whicli  we  owe  the 

'  Committees  of  both  Lords  and  Commons  sat — the  former  in  1825,  the  latter  in  1824-5. 
The  References  were  identical,  and  ran  as  follows :  '  To  inquire  into  the  state  of  Ireland,  more 
particularly  with  reference  to  the  circumstances  which  may  have  led  to  disturbances  in  that 
part  of  the  United  Kingdom.'  Bishop  Doyle  was  examined  March  21, 1825,  and  April  21, 
1825,  before  the  Lords.  • 


24  THE  VATICAN  DECRKES 

Sovereign,  are  complete,  and  full,  and  peifect,  and  undivided,  inasmuch  as  they  extend  to  all 
political,  legal,  and  civil  rights  of  the  King  or  of  his  subjects,  I  tliink  the  allegiance  due  to 
The  King  and  the  allegiance  due  to  the  Pope  are  as  distinct  and  as  divided  in  their  nature  as 
any  two  things  can  possibly  be. ' 

Such  is  the  opinion  of  the  dead  Prelate.  We  shall  presently  hear  the 
opinion  of  a  living  one.  But  the  sentiments  of  the  dead  man  power- 
fully operated  on  the  open  and  trustful  temper  of  this  people  to  induce 
them  to  grant,  at  the  cost  of  so  much  popular  feeling  and  national  tra- 
dition, the  great  and  just  concession  of  1829.  That  concession,  without 
such  declarations,  it  would,  to  say  the  least,  have  been  far  more  difficult 
to  obtain. 

Now,  bodies  are  usually  held  to  be  bound  by  the  evidence  of  their 
own  selected  and  typical  w^itnesses.  But  in  this  instance  the  colleagues 
of  those  witnesses  thought  fit  also  to  speak  collectively. 

First  let  us  quote  from  the  collective  'Declaration,'  in  the  year 
1826,  of  the  Vicars  Apostolic,  who,  with  Episcopal  authority,  governed 
the  Iloman  Catholics  of  Great  Britain  : 

'  The  allegiance  which  Catholics  hold  to  be  due,  and  are  bound  to  pay,  to  their  Sovereign, 
and  to  the  civil  authority  of  the  State,  is  perfect  and  undivided,  .  .  . 

'They  declare  that  neither  the  Pope,  nor  any  other  Prelate  or  ecclesiastical  person  of  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  Church,  .  .  .  has  any  right  to  interfere,  directly  or  indirectly,  in  the  pivil  govern- 
ment, .  .  .'  nor  to  oppose  in  any  manner  the  performance  of  the  civil  duties  which  are  due 
to  the  King.' 

Not  less  explicit  was  the  Hierarchy  of  the  Roman  communion  in  its 
*  Pastoral  Address  to  the  Clergy  and  Laity  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
in  Ireland,'  dated  January  25,  1826.  This  address  contains  a  declara- 
tion, from  wdiich  I  extract  the  following  words : 

'  It  is  a  duty  which  they  owe  to  themselves,  as  well  as  to  their  Protestant  felloiv-subjects, 
whose  good  opinion  they  value,  to  endeavor  once  more  to  remove  the  false  imputations  tliat 
have  been  frequently  cast  upon  the  faith  and  discipline  of  that  Church  which  is  intrusted  to 
their  care,  that  all  may  be  enabled  to  know  with  accuracy  their  genuine  principles.^ 

In  Article  11 : 

'They  declare  on  oath  their  belief  that  it  is  not  an  article  of  the  Catholic  Faith,  neither  are 
thev^thereby  required  to  believe,  that  the  Pope  is  infallible.' 

Aiix.  '  "fter  various  recitals,  they  set  forth : 

'After  this  full,'  explicit,  and  sworn  declaration,  we  are  utterly  at  a  loss  to  conceive  on  what 
possible  ground  we  could  be  justly  charged  with  bearing  toward  our  most  graciojis  Sovereign 
only  a  divided  allegiance. ' 

Thus,  besides  much  else  that  I  will  not  stop  to.  quote,  Papal  in- 


IN  THEIR  BEAKING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  25 

fallibility  was  most  solemnly  declared  to  be  a  matter  on  which  each 
man  might  think  as  he  pleased ;  the  Pope's  power  to  claim  obedience 
was  strictly  and  narrowly  limited :  it  was  expressly  denied  that  he  had 
any  title,  direct  or  indirect,  to  interfere  in  civil  government.  Of  the 
right  of  the  Pope  to  define  the  limits  which  divide  the  civil  from  tlie 
spiritual  by  his  own  authority,  not  one  word  is  said  by  the  Prelates  of 
either  country. 

Since  that  time  all  these  propositions  have  been  reversed.  The 
Pope's  infallibility,  when  he  speaks  ex  cathedra  on  faith  and  morals, 
has  been  declared,  with  the  assent  of  the  Bishops  of  the  Roman  Cluirch, 
to  be  an  article  of  faith,  binding  on  the  conscience  of  every  Christian ; 
his  claim  to  the  obedience  of  his  spiritual  subjects  has  been  declared 
in  like  manner  without  any  practical  limit  or  reserve ;  and  his  suprem- 
acy, without  any  reserve  of  civil  rights,  has  been  similarly  affirmed  to 
include  every  thing  which  relates  to  the  discipline  and  government  of 
the  Church  throughout  the  world.  And  these  doctrines,  we  now  know 
on  the  lilghest  authority,  it  is  of  necessity  for  salvation  to  believe. 

Independently,  however,  of  the  Vatican  Decrees  themselves,  it  is  nec- 
essary for  all  who  wish  to  understand  what  has  been  the  amount  of  the 
wonderful  change  now  consummated  in  the  Constitution  of  the  Latin 
Church,  and  what  is  the  present  degradation  of  its  Episcopal  order,  to 
observe  also  the  change,  amounting  to  revolution,  of  form  in  the  pres- 
ent, as  compared  with  other  conciliatory  decrees.  Indeed,  that  spirit 
of  centralization,  the  excesses  of  which  are  as  fatal  to  vigorous  life  in 
the  Church  as  in  the  State,  seems  now  nearly  to  have  reached  the  last 
and  furthest  point  of  possible  advancement  and  exaltation. 

When,  in  fact,  we  speak  of  the  decrees  of  the  Council  of  the  Vatican, 
we  use  a  phrase  which  will  not  bear  strict  examination.  The  Canons 
of  the  Council  of  Trent  were,  at  least,  the  real  Canons  of  a  real  Coun- 
cil; and  the  strain  in  which  they  are  promulgated  is  this:  H(kg  Sa- 
crosancta^  ecumenica^  et  generalis  Tridentina  Synodus,  in  Spiritu 
Sancto  legitime  congregata,  in  ed  pr-CBsidentibus  eisdern  trihus  "^o- 
stolicis  Legatis^  hortatur^  or  docet^  or  statidt,  or  decernit,  and  <"^  .^Ke ; 
and  its  canons,  as  published  in  Rome,  are  ^  Canones  et  decreta  Sacro- 
sancti  ecumenici  Ooncilii  2Videniini,''  ^  and  so  forth.     But  what  we 

*  BorasB :  iu  Collegio  urhano  de  Propaganda  Fide.     1833. 


26  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

have  now  to  do  with  is  the  Constitutio  Dogmatica  Prima  de  Celesta. 
OAristi,  edita  in  Sessione  tertid  of  the  Yatican  Council.  It  is  not  a 
constitution  made  by  the 'Council,  but  one  promulgated  in  the  Council.^ 
And  who  is  it  that  legislates  and  decrees?  It  is  Pius  Episcojpus,  servus 
servorum  Dei :  and  the  seductive  plural  of  his  docemus  et  dedaranius 
is  simply  the  dignified  and  ceremonious  'We'  of  Eoyal  declarations. 
The  document  is  dated  Pontificatus  nostri  Anno  XXV.:  and  the 
humble  share  of  the  assembled  Episcopate  in  the  transaction  is  repre- 
sented by  sacra  ajy^rohaiite  concilio.  And  now  for  the  Propositions 
themselves. 

First  comes  the  Pope's  infallibility : 

'  Docemus,  et  divinitus  revelatum  dogma  esse  definimus,  Eomanum  Pontificem,  cum  ex 
Cathedra  loquitur,  id  est  cum,  omnium  Christianorum  Pastoris  et  Doctoris  munere  fungens, 
pro  sui)rema  sua  Apostolica  auctoritate  doctrinam  de  fide  vel  moribus  ab  universa  Ecclesia 
tenendam  definit,  per  assistentiam  divinam,  ipsi  in  Beato  Petro  promissam,  ea  infallibilitate 
pollere,  qua  Divinus  Redemptor  Ecclesiam  suam  in  definienda  doctrina  de  fide  vel  moribus 
instructam  esse  voluit :  ideoque  ejus  Romani  Pontificis  definitiones  ex  sese  non  autem  ex 
consensu  Ecclesiai  irreformabiles  esse. '  ^ 

Will  it,  then,  be  said  that  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope  accrues  only 
when  he  speaks  ex  cathedi'd  f  Iso  doubt  this  is  a  very  material  con- 
sideration for  those  who  have  been  told  that  the  private  conscience  is 
to  derive  comfort  and  assurance  from  the  emanations  of  the  Papal 
Chair :  for  there  is  no  established  or  accepted  definition  of  the  phrase 
ex  cathedra,  and  he  has  no  power  to  obtain  one,  and  no  guide  to  direct 
him  in  his  choice  among  some  twelve  theories  on  the  subject,  which,  it 
is  said,  are  bandied  to  and  fro  among  Roman  theologians,  except  the  de- 
spised and  discarded  agency  of  his  private  judgment.  But  while  thus 
sorely  tantalized,  he  is  not  one  whit  protected.  For  there  is  still  one 
person,  and  one  only,  who  can  unquestionably  declare  ex  cathedra  what 
is  ex  cathedra  and  what  is  not,  and  who  can  declare  it  when  and  as  he 
pleases.  That  person  is  the  Pope  himself.  The  provision  is,  that  no 
document  he  issues  shall  be  valid  without  a  seal ;  but  the  seal  remains 
under  his  own  sole  lock  and  key. 


^  I  am  aware  that,  as  some  hold,  this  was  the  case  with  the  Council  of  the  Lateran  in 
A.D.  1215.  But,  first,  this  has  not  been  established  ;  secondly,  the  very  gist  of  the  evil  we 
are  dealing  with  consists  in  following  (and  enforcing)  precedents  from  the  age  of  Pope  Inno- 
cent III. 

^  Constitutio  de. Ecclesia^  e.  iv. 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  27 

Again,  it  may  be  sought  to  plead  tliat  the  Pope  is,  after  all,  only  op- 
erating by  sanctions  which  unquestionably  belong  to  the  religious  do- 
main. He  does  not  propose  to  invade  the  country,  to  seize  Woolwich 
or  burn  Portsmouth.  He  will  only,  at  the  worst,  excommunicate  op- 
ponents, as  he  has  excommunicated  Dr.  von  Dcillinger  and  others.  Is 
this  a  good  answer  ?  After  all,  even  in  the  Middle  Ages,  it  was  not  by 
tlie  direct  action  of  fleets  and  armies  of  their  own  that  the  Popes  con- 
tended with  kings  who  were  refractory ;  it  w^as  mainly  by  interdicts, 
and  by  the  refusal,  which  they  entailed  when  the  Bishops  were  not 
brave  enough  to  refuse  their  publication,  of  religious  offices  to  the  peo- 
ple. It  was  thus  that  England  suffered  under  John,  France  under 
Philip  Augustus,  Leon  under  Alphonso  the  Koble,  and  every  country 
in  its  turn.  But  the  inference  may  be  drawn  that  they  who,  while 
using  spiritual  weapons  for  such  an  end,  do  not  employ  temporal  means, 
only  fail  to  employ  them  because  they  have  them  not.  A  religious  so- 
ciety which  delivers  volleys  of  spiritual  censure  in  order  to  impede  the 
performance  of  civil  duties  does  all  the  mischief  that  is  in  its  power  to 
do,  and  brings  into  question,  in  face  of  the  State,  its  title  to  civil  pro- 
tection. 

Will  it  be  said,  finally,  that  the  Infallibility  touches  only^matter  of 
faith  and  morals?  Only  matter  of  morals !  Will  any  of  the  Koman 
casuists  kindly  acquaint  us  what  are  the  departments  and  functions  of 
human  life  which  do  not  and  can  not  fall  within  the  domain  of  morals  ? 
If  they  will  not  tell  us,  we  must  look  elsewhere.  In  his  work  entitled 
Literature  and  Dogma ^  Mr.  Matthew  Arnold  quaintly  informs  us — as 
they  tell  us  nowadays  how  many  parts  of  our  poor  bodies  are  solid  and 
how"  many  aqueous — that  about  seventy-five  per  cent,  of  all  we  do  be- 
longs to  the  department  of  '  conduct.'  Conduct  and  morals,  we  may 
suppose,  are  nearly  co-extensive.  Three  fourths,  then,  of  life  are  thus 
handed  over.  But  who  will  guarantee  to  us  the  other  fourth  ?  Cer- 
tainly not  St.  Paul,  who  says, '  Whether  therefore  ye  eat,  or  drink,  or 
whatsoever  ye  do,  do  all  to  the  glory  of  God.'  And,  *  Whatsoever  ye 
do,  in  word  or  in  deed,  do  all  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.' ^  Ko  I 
Such  a  distinction  would  be  the  unworthy  device  of  a  shallow  policy, 
vainly  used  to  hide  the  daring  of  that  wild  ambition  which  at  Rome, 

^  Pages  15,  44.  » 1  Cor.  x.  31 ;  Col.  iii.  7. 


^^ALIFOJiS^  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

not  from  the  throne,  but  from  behind  the  throne,  prompts  the  move- 
ments of  the  Yatican.  I  care  not  to  ask  if  there  be  dregs  or  tatters  of 
human  hfe,  such  as  can  escape  from  the  description  and  boundary  of 
morals.  I  submit  that  Duty  is  a  power  which  rises  with  us  in  the 
morning,  and  goes  to  rest  with  us  at  night.  It  is  co-extensive  with  the 
action  of  our  intelhgence.  It  is  the  shadow  which  cleaves  to  us  go 
where  we  will,  and  w^hicli  only  leaves  us  when  we  leave  the  light  of  life. 
So,  then,  it  is  the  supreme  direction  of  us  in  respect  to  all  Duty  which 
the  Pontiff  declares  to  belong  to  him  sacro  approhante  concilio ;  and 
this  declaration  he  makes,  not  as  an  otiose  opinion  of  the  schools,  but 
cunctis  fidelihus  credendarti  et  tenendam. 

■  But  we  shall  now  see  that,  even  if  a  loophole  had  at  this  point  been 
left  unclosed,  the  void  is  supplied  by  another  provision  of  the  Decrees. 
While  the  reach  of  the  Infallibility  is  as  wide  as  it  may  please  the 
Pope,  or  those  Avho  may  prompt  the  Pope,  to  make  it,  there  is  some- 
thing wider  still,  and  that  is  the  claim  to  an  absolute  and  entire  Obedi- 
ence. This  Obedience  is  to  be  rendered  to  his  orders  in  the  cases  I  shall 
proceed  to  point  out,  without  any  qualifying  condition,  such  as  the  ex 
catJiedrd.  The  sounding  name  of  Infallibility  has  so  fascinated  the 
public  mind,  and  riveted  it  on  the  Fourth  Chapter  of  the  Constitution 
de  Ecclesidj  that  its  near  neighbor,  the  Third  Chapter,  has,  at  least  in 
my  opinion,  received  very  much  less  than  justice.     Let  us  turn  to  it: 

'  Cujuscunque  ritfis  et  dignitatis  pastores  atque  fideles,  tarn  seorsiim  singuli  quam  simnl 
omnes,  officio  hierarchies  subordinationis  verasque  obedientiai  obstringuntur,  non  solum  in 
rebus,  qua  ad  fidem  et  mores,  set  etiam  in  iis,  qua?  ad  disciplinam  et  regimen  EcclesijE  per 
totum  orbem  diffusae  pertinent.  .  .  .  Hoec  est  Catholicae  veritatis  doctrina,  a  qua  deviare, 
salva  fide  atque  salute,  nemo  potest.  .  .  . 

'  Doeemus  etiam  et  declaramus  eum  esse  judicem  supremum  fidelium,  et  in  omnibus  causis 
ad  examen  ecclesiasticum  spectantibus  ad  ipsius  posse  judicium  recurri :  Sedis  vero  Aposto- 
lica;,  cujus  auctoritate  major  non  est,  judicium  a  nemine  fore  retractandum.  Neque  cuiquam 
de  ejus  licere  judicare  judicio.'  ^ 

Even,  therefore,  where  the  judgments  of  the  Pope  do  not  present  the 
credentials  of  Infallibility,  they  are  unappealable  and  irreversible  :  no 
person  may  pass  judgment  upon  them  ;  and  all  men,  clerical  and  lay, 
dispersedly  or  in  the  aggregate,  are  bound  truly  to  obey  them  ;  and 
from  this  rule  of  Catholic  truth  no  man  can  depart,  save  at  the  peril  of 
his  salvation.     Surely,  it  is  allowable  to  say  that  this  Third  Chapter  on 

...  *  Dogmatic  Constitutions,  etc.,  chap.  iii.     Dublin,  1870,  pp.  30-32, 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  29 

universal  Obedience  is  a  formidable  rival  to  the  Fourth  Chapter  on  In- 
fallibility. Indeed,  to  an  observer  from  witliont,  it  seems  to  leave  the 
dignity  to  the  other,  but  to  reserve  the  stringency  and  efficiency  to  it- 
self. The  Third  Chapter  is  the  Merovingian  Monarch ;  the  Fourth  is 
the  Carolingian  Mayor  of  the  Palace.  The  Third  has  an  overawing 
splendor ;  the  Fourth,  an  iron  grip.  Little  does  it  matter  to  me  whether 
my  superior  claims  infallibility,  so  long  as  he  is  entitled  to  demand  and 
exact  conformity.  This,  it  will  be  observed,  he  demands  even  in  cases 
not  covered  by  his  infallibility ;  cases,  therefore,  in  which  he  admits  it 
to  be  possible  that  he  may  be  wrong,  but  finds  it  intolerable  to  be  told 
so.  As  he  must  be  obeyed  in  all  his  judgments,  though  not  ex  cathe- 
dra^ it  seems  a  pity  he  could  not  likewise  give  the  comforting  assur- 
ance that  they  are  all  certain  to  be  right. 

But  why  this  ostensible  reduplication  —  this  apparent  surplusage? 
Why  did  the  astute  contrivers  of  this  tangled  scheme  conclude  -hat 
they  could  not  afford  to  rest  content  with  pledging  the  Council  to  In- 
fallibility in  terms  which  are  not  only  wide  to  a  high  degree^  but  elastic 
beyond  all  measure  ? 

Though  they  must  liave  known  pei-f ectly  well  that '  faith  and  morals ' 
carried  every  thing,  or  ever}^  thing  worth  having,  in  the  purely  individual 
sphere,  they  also  knew  just  as  well  that,  even  where  the  individual  was 
subjugated,  they  might  and  would. still  have  to  deal  with  the  State. 

In  mediaeval  history,  this  distinction  is  not  only  clear,  but  glaring. 
Outside  the  borders  of  some  narrow  and  proscribed  sect,  now  and  then 
emerging,  we  never,  or  scarcely  ever,  hear  of  private  and  pei*sonal  re- 
sistance to  the  Pope.  The  manful '  Protestantism '  of  mediaeval  times 
had  its  activity  almost  entirely  in  the  sphere  of  public,  national,  and 
State  rights.  Too  much  attention,  in  my  opinion,  can  not  be  fastened 
on  this  point.  It  is  the  very  root  and  kernel  of  the  matter.  Individual 
servitude,  however  abject,  will  not  satisfy  the  party  now  dominant  in 
the  Latin  Church :  the  State  must  also  be  a  slave. 

Our  Saviour  had  recognized  as  distinct  the  two  provinces  of  the  civil 
rule  and  the  Church ;  had  nowhere  intimated  that  the  spiritual  author- 
ity w^as  to  claim  the  disposal  of  physical  force,  and  to  control  in  its  own 
domain  the  authority  which  is  alone  responsible  for  external  peace, 
order,  and  safety  among  civilized  communities  of  men.  It  has  been 
alike  the  peculiarity,  the  pride,  and  the  misfortune  of  the  Koman 


30  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

Church,  among  Christian  communities,  to  allow  to  itself  an  unbounded 
use,  as  far  as  its  power  would  go,  of  earthly  instruments  for  spiritual 
ends.  We  liave  seen  with  what  ample  assurances^  this  nation  and  Par- 
liament were  fed  in  1826  ;  how  w^ell  and  roundly  the  full  and  undivided 
rights  of  the  civil  power,  and  the  separation  of  the  two  jurisdictions, 
were  affirmed.  All  this  had  at  length  been  undone,  as  far  as  Popes 
could  undo  it,  in  the  Syllabus  and  the  Encyclical.  It  remained  to  com- 
plete the  undoing  through  the  subserviency  or  pliability  of  the  Council. 
And  the  work  is  now  truly  complete.  Lest  it  should  be  said  that 
supremacy  in  faith  and  morals,  full  dominion  over  personal  belief  and 
conduct,  did  not  cover  the  collective  action  of  men  in  States,  a  third 
province  was  opened,  not  indeed  to  the  abstract  assertion  of  Infallibil- 
ity, but  to  the  far  more  practical  and  decisive  demand  of  absolute  Obe- 
dience. And  this  is  the  proper  work  of  the  Third  Chapter,  to  which  I 
am  endeavoring  to  do  a  tardy  justice.  Let  us  listen  again  to  its  few 
but  pregnant  words  on  the  point : 

'  Non  solum  in  rebus,  qua  ad  fidem  et  mores,  sed  etiam  in  iis,  qure  ad  disciplinam  et  regi- 
men Ecclesiae  per  totum  orbem  diffusse  pertinent.' 

Absolute  obedience,  it  is  boldly  declared,  is  due  to  the  Pope,  at  the 
peril  of  salvation,  not  alone  in  faith,  in  morals,  but  in  all  things  which 
concern  the  discipline  and  government  of  the  Church.  Thus  are  swept 
into  the  Papal  net  whole  multitudes  of  facts,  whole  systems  of  gov- 
ernment, prevailing,  though  in  different  degrees,  in  every  country  of 
the  world.  Even  in  the  United  States,  where  the  severance  between 
Church  and  State  is  supposed  to  be  complete,  a  long  catalogue  might 
be  drawn  of  subjects  belonging  to  the  domain  and  competency  of  the 
State,  but  also  undeniably  affecting  the  government  of  the  Churcli; 
such  as,  by  way  of  example,  marriage,  burial,  education,  prison  disci- 
pline, blasphemy,  poor-relief,  incorporation,  mortmain,  religious  endow- 
ments, vows  of  celibacy,  and  obedience.  In  Europe  the  circle  is  far 
wider,  the  points  of  contact  and  of  interlacing  almost  innumerable.  But 
on  all  matters  respecting  which  any  Pope  may  think  proper  to  declare 
that  they  concern  either  faith  or  morals,  or  the  government  or  disci- 
pline of  the  Church,  he  claims,  with  the  approval  of  a  Council  un- 

»  See  further,  Appendix  B. 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGUnCE.  '   31 

doubtedly  CEcumenical  in  the  Roman  sense,  the  absolute  obedience,  at 
the  peril  of  salvation,  of  every  member  of  his  communion. 

It  seems  not  as  yet  to  have  been  thought  wise  to  pledge  the  Council 
in  terms  to  the  Syllabus  and  the  Encyclical.  That  achievement  is  prob- 
ably reserved  for  some  one  of  its  sittings  yet  to  come.  In  the  mean- 
time it  is  well  to  remember  that  this  claim  in  respect  of  all  things  af- 
fecting the  discipline  and  government  of  the  Church,  as  well  as  faith 
and  conduct,  is  lodged  in  open  day  by  and  in  the  reign  of  a  Pontiff 
wlio  has  condemned  free  speech,  free  writing,  a  free  press,  toleration 
of  nonconformity^,  liberty  of  conscience,  the  study  of  civil  and  philo- 
sophical matters  in  independence  of  the  ecclesiastical  authority,  mar- 
riage unless  sacramentally  contracted,  and  the  definition  by  the  State 
of  the  civil  rights  {jura)  of  the  Church ;  who  has  demanded  for  the 
Church,  therefore,  the  title  to  define  its  own  civil  rights,  together  with, 
a  divine  right  to  civil  immunities,  and  a  right  to  use  physical  force ; 
and  who  has  also  proudly  asserted  that  the  Popes  of  the  Middle  Ages 
with  their  Councils  did  not  invade  the  rights  of  princes :  as  for  exam- 
ple, Gregory  YII.,  of  the  Emperor  Henry  lY. ;  Innocent  III.,  of  Ray- 
mond of  Toulouse ;  Paul  III.,  in  deposing  Henry  YIII. ;  or  Pius  Y., 
in  performing  the  like  paternal  oflSce  for  Elizabeth. 

I  submit,  then,  that  my  fourth  proposition  is  true ;  and  that  England 
is  entitled  to  ask,  and  to  know,  in  what  way  the  obedience  required  by 
the  Pope  and  the  Council  of  the  Yatican  is  to  be  reconciled  with  the 
integrity  of  civil  allegiance  ? 

It  has  been  shown  that  the  Head  of  their  Church,  so  supported  as 
undoubtedly  to  speak  with  its  highest  authority,  claims  from  Roman 
Catholics  a  plenary  obedience  to  whatever  he  may  desire  in  relation, 
not  to  faith,  but  to  morals,  and  not  only  to  tliese,  but  to  all  that  concerns 
the  government  and  discipline  of  the  Church :  that,  of  this,  much  lies 
within  the  domain  of  the  State ;  that,  to  obviate  all  misapprehension, 
the  Pope  demands  for  himself  the  right  to  determine  the  province  of 
his  own  rights,  and  has  so  defined  it  in  formal  documents  as  to  warrant 
any  and  every  invasion  of  the  civil  sphere ;  and  that  this  new  version 
of  the  principles  of  the  Papal  Church  inexorably  binds  its  members  to 
the  admission  of  these  exorbitant  claims,  without  any  refuge  or  reser- 
vation on  behalf  of  their  duty  to  the  Crown. 

Under  circumstances  such  as  these,  it  seems  not  too  much  to  ask  of 


32  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

them  to  confirm  the  opinion  which  we,  as  fellow-countrymen,  entertain 
of  them,  by  sweeping  away,  in  such  manner  and  terms  as  they  may 
think  best,  tlie  presumptive  imputations  which  their  ecclesiastical  rulers 
at  Rome,  acting  autocratically,  appear  to  have  brought  upon  their  ca- 
pacity to  pay  a  solid  and  undivided  allegiance ;  and  to  fulfill  tlie  en- 
gagement whicli  their  Bisliops,  as  political  sponsors,  promised  and  de- 
clared for  them  in  1825. 

It  would  be  impertinent,  as  well  as  needless,  to  suggest  what  should 
be  said.  All  that  is  requisite  is  to  indicate  in  substance  that  Avhich  (if 
the  foregoing  argument  be  sound)  is  not  wanted,  and  that  which  is. 
What  is  not  wanted  is  vague  and  general  assertion,  of  whatever  kind, 
and  however  sincere.  What  is  w^anted,  and  that  in  the  most  specific 
form  and  the  clearest  terms,  I  take  to  be  one  of  two  things — that  is  to 
say,  either : 

I.  A  demonstration  that  neither  in  the  name  of  faith,  nor  in  the  name 
of  morals,  nor  in  the  name  of  the  government  or  discipline  of  the 
Church,  is  the  Pope  of  Rome  able,  by  virtue  of  the  powders  asserted  for 
him  by  the  Vatican  Decree,  to  make  any  claim  upon  those  who  adliere 
to  his  communion  of  such  a  nature  as  can  impair  the  integrity  of  their 
civil  allegiance ;  or  else, 

II.  That,  if  and  when  such  claim  is  made,  it  will,  even  althongh  rest- 
ing on  the  definitions  of  the  Vatican,  be  repelled  and  rejected,  just  as 
Bishop  Doyle,  when  he  was  asked  what  the  Roman  Catholic  clergy 
would  do  if  the  Pope  intermeddled  with  their  religion,  replied  frankly : 
'  The  consequences  would  be  that  we  should  oppose  him  by  every  means 
in  our  power,  even  by  the  exercise  of  our  spiritual  authority.'  ^ 

In  the  absence  of  explicit  assurances  to  this  effect,  we  should  appear 
to  be  led,  nay,  driven,  by  just  reasoning  upon  that  documentary  evidence, 
to  the  conclusions : 

1.  That  the  Pope,  authorized  by  his  Council,  claims  for  himself  the 
domain  {a)  of  faith,  (b)  of  morals,  {c)  of  all  that  concerns  the  govern- 
ment and  discipline  of  the  Church. 

2.  That  he  in  like  manner  claims  the  power  of  determining  the  limits 
of  those  domains. 

3.  That  he  does  not  sever  them,  by  any  acknowledged  or  intelligible 
line,  from  the  domains  of  civil  duty  and  allegiance. 

1  Report,  March  18,  1826,  p.  191. 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  33 

4.  That  he  therefore  claims,  and  claims  from  the  month  of  July,  1870, 
onward,  with  plenary  authority,  from  every  convert  and  member  of  his 
Church,  that  he  shall  ^  place  his  loyalty  and  civil  duty  at  the  mercy  of 
another :'  that  other  being  himself. 

Y.  Being  Tkue,  are  the  Pkopositions  Material  ? 

But  next,  if  these  propositions  be  true,  are  they  also  material?  The 
claims  can  not,  as  I  much  fear,  be  denied  to  have  been  made.  It  can 
not  be  denied  that  the  Bishops,  who  govern  in  things  spiritual  more 
than  five  millions  (or  nearly  one  sixth)  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  United 
Kingdom,  have  in  some  cases  promoted,  in  all  cases  accepted,  these 
claims.  It  has  been  a  favorite  purpose  of  my  life  not  to  conjure  up, 
but  to  conjure  down,  public  alarms.  I  am  not  now  going  to  pretend 
that  either  foreign  foe  or  domestic  treason  can,  at  the  bidding  of  the 
Court  of  Rome,  disturb  these  peaceful  shores.  But  though  such  fears 
may  be  visionary,  it  is  more  visionary  still  to  suppose  for  one  mo- 
ment that  the  claims  of  Gregory  YII.,  of  Innocent  III.,  and  of  Boni- 
face YIII.,  have  been  disinterred,  in  the  nineteenth  century,  like  hid- 
eous mummies  picked  out  of  Egyptian  sarcophagi,  in  the  interests  of 
archaeology,  or  without  a  definite  and  practical  aim.  As  rational  beings, 
we  must  rest  assured  that  only  with  a  very  clearly  conceived  and  fore- 
gone purpose  have  these  astonishing  reassertions  been  paraded  before 
tlie  world.     What  is  that  purpose? 

I  can  well  believe  that  it  is  in  part  theological.  There  have  always 
been,  and  there  still  are,  no  small  proportion  of  our  race,  and  those  by 
no  means  in  all  respects  the  worst,  who  are  sorely  open  to  the  temj^- 
tation,  especially  in  times  of  religious  disturbance,  to  discharge  their 
spiritual  responsibilities  hy  power  of  attorney.  As  advertising  houses 
find  custom  in  proportion,  not  so  much  to  the  solidity  of  their  resources 
as  to  the  magniloquence  of  their  promises  and  assurances,  so  theolog- 
ical boldness  in  the  extension  of  such  claims  is  sure  to  pay,  by  widening 
certain  circles  of  devoted  adherents,  however  it  may  repel  the  mass  of 
mankind.  There  were  two  special  encouragements  to  this  enterprise 
at  the  present  day :  one  of  them  the  perhaps  unconscious  but  manifest 
leaning  of  some,  outside  the  Roman  precinct,  to  undue  exaltation  of 
Church  power;  the  other  the  reaction  which  is  and  must  be  brought 
about  in  favor  of  superstition,  by  the  levity  of  the  destructive  specula- 

C 


34  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

tions  so  widely  current,  and  the  notable  hardihood  of  the  anti-Christian 
writing  of  the  day. 

But  it  is  impossible  to  account  sufficiently  in  this  manner  for  the  par- 
ticular course  which  has  been  actually  pursued  by  the  Koman  Court. 
All  morbid  spiritual  appetites  would  have  been  amply  satisfied  by 
claims  to  infallibility  in  creed,  to  the  prerogative  of  miracle,  to  domin- 
ion over  the  unseen  world.  In  truth  there  was  occasion,  in  this  view, 
for  nothing  except  a  liberal  supply  of  Salmonean  thunder : 

'  Dum  flammas  Jovis,  et  sonitus  imitatur  Olympi.'^ 

All  this  could  have  been  managed  by  a  few  Tetzels,  judiciously  dis- 
tributed over  Europe.  Therefore  'the  question  still  remains.  Why  did 
that  Court,  with  policy  forever  in  its  eye,  lodge  such  formidable  de- 
mands for  power  of  the  vulgar  kind  in  that  sphere  which  is  visible,  and 
where  hard  knocks  can  undoubtedly  be  given  as  well  as  received  ? 

It  must  be  for  some  political  object,  of  a  very  tangible  kind,  that  tlie 
risks  of  so  daring  a  raid  upon  the  ciN'il  sphere  have  been  deliberately 
run. 

A  daring  raid  it  is.  For  it  is  most  evident  that  the  very  assertion 
of  principles  which  establish  an  exemption  from  allegiance,  or  which 
impair  its  completeness;  goes,  in  many  other  countries  of  Europe  far 
more  directly  than  with  us,  to  the  creation  of  political  strife,  and  to 
dangers  of  the  most  material  and  tangible  kind.  The  struggle  now 
proceeding  in  Germany  at  once  occurs  to  the  mind  as  a  palmary  in- 
stance. I  am  not  competent  to  give  any  opinion  upon  the  particulars 
of  that  struggle.  The  institutions  of  Germany,  and  the  relative  esti- 
mate of  State  power  and  individual  freedom,  are  materially  different 
from  ours.  But  I  must  say  as  much  as  this.  Firstly,  it  is  not  Prussia 
alone  that  is  touched ;  elsewhere,  too,  the  bone  lies  ready,  though  the 
contention  may  be  delayed.  In  other  States,  in  Austria  particularly, 
there  are  recent  laws  in  force  raising  much  the  same  issues  as  the  Falck 
laws  have  raised.  But  the  Roman  Court  possesses  in  perfection  one 
art — the  art  of  waiting ;  and  it  is  her  wise  maxim  to  fight  but  one  enemy 
at  a  time.  Secondly,  if  I  have  truly  represented  the  claims  promul- 
gated from  the  Vatican,  it  is  difficult  to  deny  that  those  claims,  and  the 

'  ^En.  vi.  586. 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  3$ 

power  which  has  made  them,  are  primarily  responsible  for  the  pains 
and  perils,  whatever  they  may  be,  of  the  present  conflict  between  Ger- 
man and  Roman  enactments.  And  that  which  was  once  truly  said  of 
France  may  now  also  be  said  with  not  less  truth  of  Germany :  when 
Germany  is  disquieted,  Europe  can  not  be  at  rest. 

I  should  fefel  less  anxiety  on  this  subject  had  the  Supreme  Pontiff 
frankly  recognized  his  altered  position  since  the  events  of  1870 ;  and, 
in  language  as  clear,  if  not  as  emphatic,  as  that  in  which  he  has  pro- 
scribed modern  civilization,  given  to  Europe  the  assurance  that  he 
would  be  no  party  to  the  re-establishment  by  blood  and  violence  of  the 
Temporal  Power  of  the  Church.  It  is  easy  to  conceive  that  liis  per- 
sonal benevolence,  no  less  than  his  feelings  as  an  Italian,  must  have 
inclined  him  individually  towards  a  course  so  humane — and  I  should 
add,  if  I  might  do  it  without  presumption,  so  prudent.  With  what 
appears  to  an  English  eye  a  lavish  prodigality,  successive  Italian  Gov- 
ernments have  made  over  the  ecclesiastical  powers  and  privileges  of 
tlie  Monarchy,  not  to  the  Church  of  the  country  for  the  revival  of  the 
ancient,  popular,  and  self-governing  elements  of  its  constitution,  but  to 
the  Papal  Chair  for  the  establishment  of  ecclesiastical  despotism  and 
the  suppression  of  the  last  vestiges  of  independence.  This  course,  so 
difficult  for  a  foreigner  to  appreciate,  or  even  to  justify,  has  been  met, 
not  by  reciprocal  conciliation,  but  by  a  constant  fire  of  denunciations 
and  complaints.  When  the  tone  of  these  denunciations  and  complaints 
is  compared  with  the  language  of  the  authorized  and  favored  Papal 
"organs  in  the  press,  and  of  the  Ultramontane  party  (now  the  sole  legit- 
imate party  of  the  Latin  Church)  throughout  Europe,  it  leads  many  to 
the  painful  and  revolting  conclusion  that  there  is  a  fixed  purpose  among 
the  secret  inspirers  of  Roman  policy  to  pursue,  by  the  road  of  force, 
upon  the  arrival  of  any  favorable  opportunity,  the  favorite  project  of 
re-erecting  the  terrestrial  throne  of  the  Popedom,  even  if  it  can  only 
be  re-erected  on  the  ashes  of  the  city,  and  amid  the  whitening  bones  of 
the  people.^ 

It  is  difficult  to  conceive  or  contemplate  the  effects  of  such  an  en- 
deavor. But  the  existence  at  this  day  of  the  policy,  even  in  bare  idea, 
is  itself  a  portentous  evil.     I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  it  is  an  incen- 

*  Appendix  C. 


36  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

tive  to  general  disturbance,  a  premium  upon  European  wars.  "It  is, 
in  my  opinion,  not  sanguine  only,  but  almost  ridiculous  to  imagine  that 
such  a  project  could  eventually  succeed ;  but  it  is  difficult  to  overesti- 
mate the  effect  which  it  might  produce  in  generating  and  exasperating 
strife.  It  might  even,  to  some  extent,  disturb  and  paralyze  the  action 
of  such  Governments  as  might  interpose  for  no  separate  purpose  of  their 
own,  but  only  with  a  view  to  the  maintenance  or  restoration  of  the 
general  peace.  If  the  baleful  Power  which  is  expressed  by  the  phrase 
Curia  Bomana,  and  not  at  all  adequately  rendered  in  its  historic  force 
by  tlie  usual  English  equivalent  '  Court  of  Eome,'  really  entertains 
the  scheme,  it  doubtless  counts  on  the  support  in  every  country  of  an 
organized  and  devoted  party,  which  when  it  can  command  the  scales  of 
political  power  will  promote  interference,  and  when  it  is  in  a  minori- 
ty will  work  for  securing  neutrality.  As  the  peace  of  Europe  may  be  in 
jeopardy,  and  as  the  duties  even  of  England,  as  one  (so  to  speak)  of  its 
constabulary  authorities,  might  come  to  be  in  question,  it  would  be  most 
interesting  to  know  the  mental  attitude  of  our  Eoman  Catholic  fellow- 
countrymen  in  England  and  Ireland  with  reference  to  the  subject ;  and 
it  seems  to  be  one  on  which  we  are  entitled  to  solicit  information. 

For  there  can  not  be  the  smallest  doubt  that  the  temporal  power  of 
the  Popedom  comes  within  the  true  meaning  of  the  words  used  at  the 
Vatican  to  describe  the  subjects  on  which  the  Pope  is  authorized  to 
claim,  under  lawful  sanctions,  the  obedience  of  the  '  faithful.'  It  is 
even  possible  that  we  have  here  the  key  to  the  enlargement  of  the  prov- 
ince of  Obedience  beyond  the  limits  of  Infallibility,  and  to  the  intro- 
duction of  the  remarkable  phrase  ad  discijplinam  et  regimen  Ecclesioe. 
No  impartial  person  can  deny  that  the  question  of  the  Temporal  Power 
very  evidently  concerns  the  discipline  and  government  of  the  Church 
— concerns  it,  and  most  mischievously  as  I  should  venture  to  think; 
but  in  the  opinion,  up  to  a  late  date,  of  many  Koman  Catholics,  not 
only  most  beneficially,  but  even  essentially.  Let  it  be  remembered 
that  such  a  man  as  the  late  Count  Montalembert,  who  in  his  general 
politics  was  of  the  Liberal  party,  did  not  scruple  to  hold  that  the  mill- 
ions of  Koman  Catholics  throughout  the  world  were  copartners  with 
the  inhabitants  of  the' States  of  the  Church  in  regard  to  their  civil  gov- 
ernment ;  and,  as  constituting  the  vast  majority,  were  of  course  entitled 
to  override  them.     It  was  also  rather  commonly  held,  a  quarter  of  a 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  37 

century  ago,  that  the  question  of  the  States  of  the  Church  was  one  with 
which  none  but  Roman  Catholic  Powers  could  have  any  thing  to  do. 
This  doctrine,  I  must  own,  was  to  me  at  all  times  unintelligible.  It  is 
now,  to  say  the  least,  hopelessly  and  irrecoverably  obsolete. 

Archbishop  Manning,  who  is  the  head  of  the  Papal  Church  in  En- 
gland, and  whose  ecclesiastical  tone  is  supposed  to  be  in  the  closest  ac- 
cordance witli  that  of  his  head-quarters,  has  not  thought  it  too  much  to 
say  that  the  civil  order  of  all  Christendom  is  the  offspring  of  the  Tem- 
poral Power,  and  has  the  Temporal  Power  for  its*  keystone ;  that  on 
the  destruction  of  the  Temporal  Power  Hhe  laws  of  nations  would  at 
once  fall  in  ruins ;'  that  (our  old  friend)  the  deposing  Power  '  taught 
subjects  obedience  and  princes  clemency.'^  ^ay?  this  high  authority 
has  proceeded  further,  and  has  elevated  the  Temporal  Power  to  the 
rank  of  necessary  doctrine. 

*  The  Catholic  Church  can  not  be  silent — it  can  not  hold  its  peace;  it  can  not  cease  to  preach 
the  doctrines  of  Revelation,  not  only  of  the  Trinity  and  of  the  Incarnation,  but  likewise  of 
the  Seven  Sacraments,  and  of  the  Infallibility  of  the  Church  of  God,  and  of  the  necessity  of 
Unity,  and  of  the  Sovereignty,  both  spiritual  and  temporal,  of  the  Holy  See.'* 

I  never,  for  m}^own  part,  heard  that  the  work  containing  this  remark- 
able passage  was  placed  in  the  *  Index  Prohibitorum  Librorum.'  On 
the  contrary,  its  distinguished  author  was  elevated,  on  the  first  oppor- 
tunity, to  the  headship  of  the  Roman  Episcopacy  in  England,  and  to 
the  guidance  of  the  million  or  thereabouts  of  souls  in  its  communion. 
And  the  more  recent  utterances  of  the  oracle  have  not  descended  from 
the  high  level  of  those  already  cited.  They  have,  indeed,  the  recom- 
mendation of  a  comment,  not  without  fair  claims  to  authority,  on  the 
recent  declarations  of  the  Pope  and  the  Council,  and  of  one  which  goes 
to  prove  how  far  I  am  from  having  exaggerated  or  strained  in  the  fore- 
going pages  the  meaning  of  those  declarations.  Especially  does  this 
hold  good  on  the  one  point,  the  most  vital  of  the  whole — the  title  to 
define  the  border-line  of  the  two  provinces,  which  the  Archbishop  not 
unfairly  takes  to  be  the  true  criterion  of  supremacy  as  between  rival 
powers  like  the  Church  and  the  State. 

*If,  then,  the  civil  power  be  not  competent  to  decide  the  limits  of  the  spiritual  power,  nnd 
if  the  spiritual  power  can  define,  with  a  divine  certainty,  its  own  limits,  it  is  evidently  su- 


'  Three  Lectures  on  the  Temporal  Sovereignty  of  the  Popes,  1860,  pp.  34,  46,  47,  58,  59,  63. 
»  The  Present  Crisis  of  the  Holy  See,    By  H.  E.  Manning,  D.D.    London,  1861 ,  p.  73. 


38  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

preme.  Or,  in  other  words,  the  spiritual  power  knows,  with  divine  certainty,  the  limits  of 
its  own  jurisdiction  :  and  it  knows,  therefore,  the  limits  and  the  competence  of  the  civil  pow- 
er. It  is  thereby,  in  matters  of  religion  and  conscience,  supreme.  I  do  not  see  how  this  can 
be  denied  without  denying  Christianity.  And  if  this  be  so,  this  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Bull 
Unam  Sanctain,^  and  of  the  Syllabus,  and  of  the  Vatican  Council.  It  is,  in  fact,  Ultramon- 
tanism,  for  this  term  means  neither  less  nor  more.  The  Church,  therefore,  is  separate  and 
supreme. 

*  Let  us,  then,  ascertain  somewhat  further  what  is  the  meaning  of  supreme.  Any  power 
which  is  independent,  and  can  alone  fix  the  limits  of  its  own  jurisdiction,  and  can  thereby  fix 
the  limits  of  all  other  jurisdictions,  is,  ipso  facto,  sujyreme.  ^  But  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ, 
within  the  sphere  of  revelation,  of  faith  and  morals,  is  all  this,  or  is  nothing,  or  worse  than 
nothing,  an  imposture  and  a  usurpation — that  is,  it  is  Christ  or  Antichrist. '^ 

But  the  whole  pamphlet  should  be  read  by  those  who  desire  to  know 
the  true  sense  of  the  Papal  declarations  and  Vatican  Decrees,  as  they 
are  understood  by  the  most  favored  ecclesiastics ;  understood,  I  am 
bound  to  own,  so  far  as  I  can  see,  in  their  natural,  legitimate,  and  in- 
evitable sense.  Such  readers  will  be  assisted  by  the  treatise  in  seeing 
clearly,  and  in  admitting  frankly  that,  w^hatever  demands  may  hereafter, 
and  in  whatever  circumstances,  be  made  upon  us,  we  shall  be  unable  to 
advance  w^ith  any  fairness  the  plea  that  it  has  been  done  without-  due 
notice. 

There  are  millions  upon  millions  of  the  Protestants  of  this  country 
who  would  agree  with  Archbishop  Manning  if  he  were  simply  telling 
us  that  divine  truth  is  not  to  be  sought  from  the  lips  of  the  State,  nor 
to  be  sacrificed  at  its  command.  But  those  millions  would  tell  him,  in 
return,  that  the  State,  as  the  power  which  is  alone  responsible  for  the 
external  order  of  the  world,  can  alone  conclusively  and  finally  be  com- 
petent to  determine  what  is  to  take  place  in  the  sphere  of  that  external 
order. 

I  have  shown,  then,  that  the  Propositions,  especially  that  w^hich  has 
been  felt  to  be  the  chief  one  among  them,  being  true,  are  also  material ; 
material  to  be  generally  known,  and  clearly  understood,  and  well  con- 
sidered, on  civil  grounds ;  inasmuch  as  they  invade,  at  a  multitude  of 
points,  the  civil  sphere,  and  seem  even  to  have  no  very  remote  or  shad- 
owy connection  with  the  future  peace  and  security  of  Christendom. 

'  On  the  Bull  Unam  Sanctum,  'of  a  most  odious  kind,'  see  Bishop  Doyle's  Essay,  already 
cited.     He  thus  describes  it. 
^  The  italics  are  not  in  the  original. 
^  Ccesarism  and  Ultramontanism.     By  Archbishop  Manning,  1874,  pp.  35,  36. 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  39 

YI.  Were  the  Peopositions  Peopek  to  be  set  foetii  by  the 
Peesent  Weitee  ? 

There  remains  yet  before  us  only  the  shortest  and  least  significant 
portion  of  the  inquiry,  namely,  whether  these  things,  being  true,  and 
being  material  to  be  said,  were  also  proper  to  be  said  by  me.  I  must 
ask  pardon  if  a  tone  of  egotism  be  detected  in  this  necessarily  subordi- 
nate portion  of  my  remarks. 

For  thirty  years,  and  in  a  great  variety  of  circumstances,  in  office 
and  as  an  independent  Member  of  Parliament,  in  majorities  and  in 
small  minorities,  and  during  the  larger  portion  of  the  time  ^  as  the  rep- 
resentative of  a  great  constituency,  mainly  clerical,  I  have,  with  others, 
labored  to  maintain  and  extend  the  civil  rights  of  my  Roman  Catholic 
fellow-countrymen.  The  Liberal  party  of  this  country,  with  which  I 
have  been  commonly  associated,  has  suffered,  and  sometimes  suffered 
heavily,  in  public  favor  and  in  influence,  from  the  belief  that  it  was  too 
ardent  in  the  pursuit  of  that  policy ;  w^hile  at  the  same  time  it  has  al- 
ways been  in  the  worst  odor  with  the  Court  of  Eome,  in  consequence 
of  its  (I  hope)  unalterable  attachment  to  Italian  liberty  and  independ- 
ence. I  have  sometimes  been  the  spokesman  of  that  party  in  recom- 
mendations w^hich  have  tended  to  foster,  in  fact,  the  imputation  I  have 
mentioned,  though  not  to  warrant  it  as  matter  of  reason.  But  it  has 
existed  in  fact.  So  that  while  (as  I  think)  general  justice  to  society 
required  that  these  things  which  I  have  now  set  forth  should  be  writ- 
ten, special  justice,  as  toward  the  party  to  which  I  am  loyally  attached, 
and  which  I  may  have  had  a  share  in  thus  placing  at  a  disadvantage 
before  our  countrymen,  made  it,  to  say  the  least,  becoming  that  I  should 
not  shrink  from  writing  them. 

In  discharging  that  office,  I  have  sought  to  perform  the  part,  not  of  a 
theological  partisan,  but  simply  of  a  good  citizen ;  of  one  hopeful  that 
many  of  his  Eoman  Catholic  friends  and  fellow-countrymen,  who  are, 
to  say  the  Iqast  of  it,  as  good  citizens  as  himself,  may  perceive  that  the 
case  is  not  a  frivolous  case,  but  one  that  merits  their  attention: 

I  will  next  proceed  to  give  the  reason  why,  up  to  a  recent  date,  I 
have  thought  it  right  in  the  main  to  leave  to  any  others  who  might 
feel  it  the  duty  of  dealing  in  detail  with  this  question. 

^  From  1847  to  1865  I  sat  for  the  University  of  Oxford. 


40  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

The  great  change  which  seems  to  me  to  have  been  brought  about  in 
the  position  of  Euman  Catholic  Christians  as  citizens  reached  its  con- 
summation and  came  into  full  operation  in  July,  1870,  by  the  proceed- 
ings or  so-called  decrees  of  the  Vatican  Council. 

Up  to  that  time,  opinion  in  the  Eoman  Church  on  all  matters  involv- 
ing civil  liberty,  though  partially  and  sometimes  widely  intimidated, 
was  free  wherever  it  was  resolute.  During  the  Middle  Ages  heresy 
was  often  extinguished  in  blood  ;  but  in  every  Cisalpine  country  a  prin- 
ciple of  liberty,  to  a  great  extent,  held  its  own,  and  national  life  re- 
fused to  be  put  down.  Kay  more,  these  precious  and  inestimable  gifts 
had  not  infrequently  for  their  champions  a  local  prelacy  and  clergy. 
The  Constitutions  of  Clarendon,  cursed  from  the  Papal  throne,  were 
the  work  of  the  English  Bishops.  Stephen  Langton,  appointed  direct- 
ly, through  an  extraordinary  stretch  of  power,  by  Innocent  III.,  to  the 
See  of  Canterbury,  headed  the  Barons  of  England  in  extorting  from 
the  Papal  minion  John,  the  worst  and  basest  of  all  our  sovereigns,  that 
Magna  Charta  which  the  Pope  at  once  visited  with  his  anathemas.  In 
the  reign  of  Henry  YIII.,  it  was  Tunstal,  Bishop  of  Durham,  who  first 
wrote  against  the  Papal  domination.  Tunstal  was  followed  by  Gardi- 
ner ;  and  even  the  recognition  of  the  Royal  Headship  w^as  voted  by  the 
clergy,  not  under  Cranmer,  but  under  his  unsuspected  predecessor  War- 
ham.  Strong  and  domineering  as  was  the  high  Papal  party  in  those 
centuries,  the  resistance  was  manful.  Thrice  in  history  it  seemed  as  if 
what  we  may  call  the  Constitutional  party  in  the  Church  was  about  to 
triumph :  first,  at  the  epoch  of  the  Council  of  Constance ;  secondly, 
when  the  French  Episcopate  was  in  conflict  with  Pope  Innocent  XL ; 
thirdly,  when  Clement  XIY.  leveled  with  the  dust  the  deadliest  foes 
that  mental  and  moral  liberty  have  ever  known.  But  from  July,  1870, 
this  state  of  things  has  passed  away,  and  the  death-w^arrant  of  that  Con- 
stitutional party  has  been  signed,  and  sealed,  and  promulgated  in  form. 

Before  that  time  arrived,  although  I  had  used  expressions  sufficiently 
indicative  as  to  the  tendency  of  things  in  the  great  Latin  Communion, 
yet  I  had  for  very  many  years  felt  it  to  be  the  first  and  paramount 
duty  of  the  British  Legislature,  whatever  Rome  might  say  or  do,  to 
give  to  Ireland  all  that  justice  could  demand  in  regard  to  matters  of 
conscience  and  of  civil  equality,  and  thus  to  set  herself  right  in  the 
opinion  of  the  civilized  world.     So  far  from  seeing,  what  some  believed 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  41 

the  J  saw,  a  spirit  of  unworthy  compliance  in  sncli  a  course,  it  appeared 
to  me  the  only  one  which  suited  either  the  dignity  or  the  duty  of  my 
country.  While  this  debt  remained  unpaid,  both  before  and  after 
1870,  I  did  not  think  it  my  province  to  open  formally  a  line  of  argu- 
ment on  a  question  of  prospective  rather  than  immediate  moment, 
which  might  have  prejudiced  the  matter  of  duty  lying  nearest  our 
hand,  and  morally  injured  Great  Britain  not  less  than  Ireland,  Church- 
men and  Nonconformists  not  less  than  adherents  of  the  Papal  Com- 
munion, by  slackening  the  disposition  to  pay  the  debt  of  justice. 
When  Parliament  had  passed  the  Church  Act  of  1869  and  the  Land 
Act  of  1870,  there  remained  only,  under  the  great  head  of  Imperial 
equity,  one  serious  question  to  be  dealt  with — that  of  the  higher  Edu- 
cation. I  consider  that  the  Liberal  majority  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, and  the  Government  to  which  I  had  the  honor  and  satisfaction 
to  belong,  formally  tendered  payment  in  full  of  this  portion  of  the  debt 
by  the  Irish  University  Bill  of  February,  1873.  Some,  indeed,  think 
that  it  was  overpaid :  a  question  into  w^hich  this  is  manifestly  not  the 
place  to  enter.  But  the  Koman  Catholic  prelacy  of  Ireland  thought  fit 
to  procure  the  rejection  of  that  measure  by  the  direct  influence  which 
they  exercised  over  a  certain  number  of  Irish  Members  of  Parliament, 
and  by  the  temptation  which  they  thus  offered — the  bid,  in  effect,  which 
(to  use  a  homely  phrase)  they  made  to  attract  the  support  of  the  Tory  Op- 
position. Their  efforts  were  crowned  with  a  complete  success.  From 
that  time  forward  I  have  felt  that  the  situation  was  changed,  and  that 
important  matters  would  have  to  be  cleared  by  suitable  explanations. 
The  debt  to  Ireland  had  been  paid  :  a  debt  to  the  country  at  large  had 
still  to  be  disposed  of,  and  this  has  come  to  be  the  duty  of  the  hour. 
So  long,  indeed,  as  I  continued  to  be  Prime  Minister,  I  should  not 
have  considered  a  broad  political  discussion  on  a  general  question  suit- 
able to  proceed  from  me ;  while  neither  I  nor  (I  am  certain)  my  col- 
leagues would  have  been  disposed  to  run  the  risk  of  stirring  popular 
passions  by  a  vulgar  and  unexplained  appeal.  But  every  difficulty 
arising  from  the  necessary  limitations  of  an  official  position  has  now 
been  removed. 


-^  >^  .  »•  "  ^  '    Y    >v 

r.>riVERSITT 

Op  ^  ^r4\h-/        THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

YII.  On  the  Home  Policy  of  the  Future. 

I  could  not,  however,  conclude  these  observations  without  antici- 
pating and  answering  an  inquiry  they  suggest.  'Are  they,  then,'  it 
will  be  asked,  '  a  recantation  and  a  regret  ?  and  what  are  they  meant 
to-  recommend  as  the  policy  of  the  future  V  My  reply  shall  be  suc- 
cinct and  plain.  Of  what  the  Liberal  party  lias  accomplished,  by  w^ord 
or  deed,  in  establishing  the  full  civil  equality  of  Eoman  Catholics,  I 
regret  nothing,  and  I  recant  nothing. 

It  is  certainly  a  political  misfortune  that,  during  the  last  thirty 
years,  a  Church  so  tainted  in  its  views  of  civil  obedience,  and  so  un- 
duly capable  of  changing  its  front  and  language  after  Emancipation 
from  what  it  had  been  before — like  an  actor  who  has  to  perform  several 
characters  in  one  piece — should  have  acquired  an  extension  of  its  hold 
upon  the  highest  classes  of  this  countiy.  The  conquests  have  been 
chiefly,  as  might  have  been  expected,  among  women ;  but  the  number 
of  male  converts,  or  captives  (as  I  might  prefer  to  call  them),  has  not 
been  inconsiderable.  There  is  no  doubt  that  every  one  of  these  seces- 
sions is  in  the  nature  of  a  considerable  moral  and  social  severance. 
The  breadth  of  this  gap  varies,  according  to  varieties  of  individual  char- 
acter. But  it  is  too  commonly  a  wide  one.  Too  commonly  the  spirit 
of  the  neophyte  is  expressed  by  the  words  which  have  become  notori- 
ous :  'A  Catholic  first,  an  Englishman  afterwards.'  Words  which  prop- 
erly convey  no  more  than  a  truism;  for  every  Christian  must  seek  to 
place  his  religion  even  before  his  country  in  his  inner  heart.  But  very 
far  from  a  truism  in  the  sense  in  which  we  have  been  led  to  construe 
them.  We  take  them  to  mean  that  the  *  convert'  intends,  in  case  of 
any  conflict  between  the  Queen  and  the  Pope,  to  follow  the  Pope,  and 
let  the  Queen  shift  for  herself ;  which,  happily,  she  can  well  do. 

Usually,'  in  this  country,  a  movement  in  tlie  highest  class  would  raise 
a  presumption  of  a  similar  movement  in  the  mass.  It  is  not  so  here. 
Pumors  have  gone  about  that  the  proportion  of  members  of  the  Papal 
Church  to  the  population  has  increased,  especially  in  England.  But 
these  rumors  would  seem  to  be  confuted  by  authentic  figures.  The 
Poman  Catholic  Marriages,  which  supply  a  competent  test,  and  which 
were  4.89  per  cent,  of  the  whole  in  1854,  and  4.62  per  cent,  in  1859, 
were  4.09  per  cent,  in  1869,  and  4.02  per  cent,  in  1871. 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  43 

There  is  something  at  the  least  abnormal  in  such  a  partial  growth, 
taking  eifect  as  it  does  among  the  wealthy  and  noble,  while  the  people 
can  not  be  charmed,  by  any  incantation,  into  the  Roman  camp.  The 
original  Gospel  was  supposed  to  be  meant  especially  for  the  poor ;  but 
the  gospel  of  the  nineteenth  century  from  Rome  courts  another  and 
less  modest  destination.  If  the  Pope  does  not  control  more  souls 
among  us,  he  certainly  controls  more  acres. 

The  severance,  however,  of  a  certain  number  of  lords  of  the  soil 
from  those  who  till  it  can  be  borne.  And  so  I  trust  will  in  like  man- 
ner be  endured  tlie  new  and  very  real  *  aggression'  of  the  principles 
promulgated  by  Papal  authority,  whetlier  they  are  or  are  not  loyally 
disclaimed.  In  this  matter  eacli  man  is  his  own  judge  and  his  own 
guide :  I  can  speak  for  myself.  I  am  no  longer  able  to  say,  as  I 
would  have  said  before  1870,  'There  is  nothing  in  the  necessary  be- 
lief of  the  Roman  Catholic  which  can  appear  to  impeach  his  full  civil 
title;  for,  whatsoever  be  the  follies  of  ecclesiastical  power  in  his 
Church,  his  Church  itself  has  not  required  of  him,  with  binding  au- 
thority, to  assent  to  any  principles  inconsistent  with  his  civil  duty.' 
That  ground  is  now,  for  the  present  at  least,  cut  from  under  my  feet. 
What,  then,  is  to  be  our  course  of  policy  hereafter  ?  First,  let  me  say 
that,  as  regards  the  great  Imperial  settlement,  achieved  by  slow  de- 
grees, which  has  admitted  men  of  all  creeds  subsisting  among  us  to 
Parliament,  that  I  conceive  to  be  so  determined  beyond  all  doubt  or 
question  as  to  have  become  one  of  the  deep  foundation-stones  of  the 
existing  Constitution.  But  inasmuch  as,  short  of  this  great  charter  of 
public  liberty,  and  independently  of  all  that  has  been  done,  there  are 
pending  matters  of  comparatively  minor  moment  which  have  been,  or 
may  be,  subjects  of  discussion,  not  without  interest  attaching  to  them, 
I  can  suppose  a  question  to  arise  in  the  minds  of  some.  My  own 
views  and  intentions  in  the  future  are  of  the  smallest  significance. 
But,  if  the  arguments  I  have  here  offered  make  it  my  duty  to  declare 
them,  I  say  at  once  the  future  will  be  exactly  as  the  past :  in  the  little 
that  depends  on  me,  I  shall  be  guided  hereafter,  as  heretofore,  by  the 
rule  of  maintaining  equal  civil  rights  irrespectively  of  religious  differ- 
ences ;  and  shall  resist  all  attempts  to  exclude  the  members  of  the  Ro- 
man Church  from  the  benefit  of  that  rule.  Indeed,  I  may  say  that  I 
have  already  given  conclusive  indications  of  this  view,  by  supporting 


44r  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

in  Parliament,  as  a  Minister,  since  1870,  the  repeal  of  tlie  Ecclesiastical 
Titles  Act,  for  what  I  think  ample  reasons.  !N^ot  only  because  the  time 
has  not  ^-et  come  when  we  can  assume  the  consequences  of  the  rev- 
olutionary measures  of  1870  to  liave  been  thoroughly  weighed  and 
digested  by  all  capable  men  in  the  Roman  Communion.  Not  only 
because  so  great  a  numerical  proportion  are,  as  I  have  before  observed, 
necessarily  incapable  of  mastering,  and  forming  their  personal  judg- 
ment upon,  the  case.  Quite  irrespectively  even  of  these  considera- 
tions, I  hold  that  our  onward  even  course  should  not  be  changed  by 
follies,  the  consequences  of  which,  if  the  worst  come  to  the  worst,  this 
country  will  have  alike  the  power  and,  in  case  of  need,  the  will  to 
control.  The  State  w^ill,  I  trust,  be  ever  careful  to  leave  the  domain 
of  religious  conscience  free,  and  yet  to  keep  it  to  its  own  domain;  and 
to  allow  neither  private  caprice  nor,  above  all,  foreign  arrogance  to 
dictate  to  it  in  the  discharge  of  its  proper  office.  'England  expects 
every  man  to  do  his  duty;'  and  none  can  be  so  well  prepared  under  all 
circumstances  to  exact  its  performance  as  that  Liberal  party  which  has 
done  the  work  of  justice  alike  for  Nonconformists  and  for  Papal  dis- 
sidents, and  whose  members  have  so  often,  for  the  sake  of  that  work, 
hazarded  their  credit  with  the  markedly  Protestant  constituencies  of 
the  country.  Strong  the  State  of  the  United  Kingdom  has  always 
been  in  material  strength ;  and  its  moral  panoply  is  now,  we  may  hope, 
pretty  complete. 

It  is  not,  then,  for  the  dignity  of  the  Crown  and  people  of  the  Unit- 
ed Kingdom  to  be  diverted  from  a  path  which  they  have  deliberately 
chosen,  and  which  it  does  not  rest  with  all  the  myrmidons  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Chamber  either  openly  to  obstruct  or  secretly  to  undermine.  It 
is  rightfully  to  be  expected,  it  is  greatly  to  be  desired,  that  the  Roman 
Catholics  of  this  country  should  do  in  the  Nineteenth  century  what 
their  forefathers  of  England,  except  a  handful  of  emissaries,  did  in  the 
Sixteenth,  when  they  were  marshaled  in  resistance  to  the  Armada,  and 
in  the  Seventeenth,  when,  in  despite  of  the  Papal  Chair,  they  sat  in  the 
House  of  Lords  under  the  Oath  of  Allegiance.  That  which  we  are 
entitled  to  desire,  we  are  entitled  also  to  expect:  indeed,  to  say  we  did 
not  expect  it  would  in  my  judgment  be  the  true  way  of  conveying  an 
'insult'  to  those  concerned.  In  this  expectation  we  may  be  partially 
disappointed.    Should  those  to  whom  I  appeal  thus  unhappily  come  to 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  45 

Ijear  witness  in  their  own  persons  to  the  decay  of  sound,  inanly,  true 
life  in  their  Church,  it  will  be  their  loss  more  than  ours.  The  inhabit- 
ants of  these  Islands,  as  a  whole,  are  stable,  though  sometimes  credu- 
lous and  excitable ;  resolute,  though  sometimes  boastful :  and  a  strong- 
headed  and  sound-hearted  race  will  not  be  hindered,  either  by  latent 
or  by  avowed  dissents,  due  to  the  foreign  influence  of  a  caste,  from 
the  accomplishment  of  its  mission  in  the  world. 


U'^IVEKSITT 


APPENDICES 


APPENDIX  A. 


The  number's  here  given  correspond  with  those  of  the  Eighteen  Propositions 
given  in  the  text,  lohere  it  icould  have  been  less  convejiient  to  cite  the 
originals, 

1,2,3.  *Ex  qua  omnino  falsa  socialis  regiminis  idea  baud  timent  er- 
roneam  illam  fovere  opinionem,  Catholicse  Ecclesiae,  animarumque  saluti 
maxime  exitialem,  a  rec.  mem.  Gregorio  XIY.  praedecessore  JSTostro  deli- 
ramentum  appellatam  (eadem  Eiicycl.  mirari),  nimirum,  libertatem  con- 
scientise  et  eultuum  esse  proprium  cujuscunque  hominis  jus,  quod  lege 
proclaniari,  et  asseri  debet  in  omni  recte  constituta  societate,  et  jus  civi- 
bus  inesse  ad  omnimodara  libertatem  nulla  vel  ecclesiastica,  vel  civili 
auctoritate  coarctandam,  quo  suos  conceptus  quoscumque  sive  voce  sive 
typis,  sive  alia  ratione  palam  publiceque  manifestare  ac  declarare  valeant.' 
— Encyclical  Letter. 

4.  '  Atque  silentio  prseterire  non  possumus  eorum  audaciam,  qui  sanam 
non  sustinentes  doctrinam  "illis  Apostolicae  Sedis  judiciis,  et  decretis, 
quorum  objectum  ad  bonum  generale  Ecclesise,  ejusdemque  jura,  ac  dis- 
ciplinam  spectare  declaratur,  duramodo  fidei  morumque  dogmata  non 
attingat,  posse  assensum  et  obedientiam  detrectari  absque  peceato,  et 
absque  ulla  Catholicse  professionis  jactura."  ' — Ibid. 

5.  'Ecclesia  non  est  vera  perfectaque  societas  plane  libera,  nee  pollet 
suis  propriis  et  constantibus  juribus  sibi  a  divino  suo  Fundatore  collatis, 
sed  civilis  potestatis  est  definire  quae  sint  Ecclesise  jura,  ac  limites,  intra 
quos  eadem  jura  exercere  queat.' — Syllabus  v. 

6.  '  Romani  Pontifices  et  Concilia  oecumenica  a  limitibus  suae  potesta- 
tis recesserunt,  jura  Principum  usurparunt,  atque  etiam  in  rebus  fidei  et 
morum  definiendis  errarunt.' — Ibid,  xxiii. 

7.  *Ecclesia  vis  inferendse  potestatem  non  habet,  neque  potestatem 
ullam  temporalem  directam  vel  indirectam.' — Ibid.  xxiv. 

8.  'Prseter  potestatem  episcopatui  inhaerentem,  alia  est  attributa  tern- 


48  ,    APPENDICES. 

poralis  potestas  a  civili  imperio  vel  express^  vel  tacite  coiicessa,  revocan- 
da  propterea,  cum  libuerit,  a  civili  imperio.' — Syllabus  xxvs 

9.  *Ecclesiae  et  personarum  ecclesiasticarum  immunitas  a  jure  civili 
ortum  habuit.' — Ibid.  xxx. 

10.  'In  conflictu  legum  utriusque  potestatis,  jus  civile  prsevalet.' — 
Ibid,  xlii. 

11.  *Catholicis  viris  probari  potest  ea  juventutis  instituends3  ratio,  qua3 
sit  a  Catholica  fide  et  ab  Ecclesise  potestate  sejuncta,  quaeque  rerura  dum- 
taxat,  naturalium  scientiam  ac  terrense  socialis  vitse  fines  tantummodo  vel 
saltem  primarium  spectet.' — Ibid,  xlviii. 

12.  *Philosophicarum  rerum  morumque  scientia,  itemque  civiles  leges 
possunt  et  debent  a  divina  et  ecclesiastica  auctoritate  declinare.' — 
Ibid.  Ivii. 

13.  *  Matrimonii  sacramentum  non  est  nisi  contractui  accessorium  ab 
eoque  separabile,  ipsumque  sacramentum  in  una  tantum  nuptiali  benedic- 
tione  situm  esV—Ibid.  Ixvi. 

'  Yi  contractus  mere  civilis  potest  inter  Christianos  constare  veri  nomi- 
iiis  matrimonium;  falsumque  est,  aut  contractum  matrimonii  inter  Chris- 
tianos semper  esse  sacramentum,  aut  nullum  esse  contractum,  si  sacramen- 
tum excludatur.' — Ibid.  Ixxiii. 

14.  'De  temporalis  regni  cum  spirituali  compatibilitate  disputant  inter 
se  Christianae  et  Catholicae  Ecclesise  filii.' — Ibid.  Ixxv. 

15.  *  Abrogatio  civilis  imperii,  quo  Apostolica  Sedes  potitur,  ad  Ecclesise 
libertatem  felicitatemque  vel  maxime  conduceret.' — Ibid.  Ixxvi. 

IQ.  '-^tate  hac  nostra  non  amplius  expedit  religionem  Catholicam 
haberi  tanquam  unicam  status  religionem,  cseteris  quibuscumque  cultibus 
exclusis.' — Ibid.  Ixxvii. 

11.  'Hinc  laudabiliter  in  quibusdam  Catholici  nominis  regionibus  lege 
cautum  est,  ut  hominibus  illuc  immigrantibus  liceat  publicum  proprii 
cujusque  cultus  exercitium  habere.' — Ibid.  Ixxviii. 

18.  '  Romanus  Pontifex  potest  ac  debet  cum  pro^ressu,  cum  liberalismo 
et  cum  recenti  civilitate  sese  reconciliare  et  componere.' — Ibid.  Ixxx. 


APPENDIX  B. 

I  have  contented  myself  with  a  minimum  of  citation  from  the  docu- 
ments of  the  period  before  Emancipation.  Their  full  effect  can  only  be 
gathered  by  such  as  are  acquainted  with,  or  will  take  the  trouble  to  re- 
fer largely  to,  the  originals.     It  is  worth  while,  however,  to  cite  the  fol- 


APPENDICES.  49 

lowing  passage  from  Bishop  Doyle,  as  it  may  convey,  through  the  indig- 
nation it  expresses,  an  idea  of  the  amplitude  of  the  assurances  which  had 
been  (as  I  believe,  most  honestly  and  sincerely)  given : 

*  There  is  no  justice,  my  Lord,  in  thus  condemning  us.  Such  conduct 
on  the  part  of  our  opponents  creates  in  our  bosoms  a  sense  of  wrong  be- 
ing done  to  us;  it  exhausts  our  patience,  it  provokes  our  indignation, 
and  prevents  us  from  reiterating  our  eiforts  to  obtain  a  more  impartial 
hearing.  We  are  tempted,  in  such  cases  as  these,  to  attribute  unfair 
motives  to  those  who  differ  from  us,  as  we  can  not  conceive  how  men 
gifted  with  intelligence  can  fail  to  discover  truths  so  plainly  demon- 
strated as — 

'That  our  faith  or  our  allegiance  is  not  regulated  by  any  such  doc- 
trines as  those  imputed  to  us ; 

'That  our  duties  to  the  Government  of  our  country  are  not  influenced 
nor  affected  by  any  Bulls  or  practices  of  Popes ; 

'That  these  duties  are  to  be  learned  by  us,  as  by  every  other  class  of 
His  Majesty's  subjects,  from  the  Gospel,  from  the  reason  given  to  us  by 
God,  from  that  love  of  country  which  nature  has  implanted  in  our  hearts, 
and  from  those  constitutional  maxims  which  are  as  well  understood  and 
as  highly  appreciated  by  Catholics  of  the  present  day  as  by  their  an- 
cestors, who  founded  them  with  Alfred,  or  secured  them  at  Runnymede.' 
— Doyle's  Essay  on  the  Catholic  Claims,  London,  1826,  p.  38. 

The  same  general  tone  as  in  1826  was  maintained  in  the  ansvrers  of 
the  witnesses  from  Maynooth  College  before  the  Commission  of  1855. 
See,  for  example,  pp.  132, 161-4,  272-3,  275,  361,  370-5,  381-2,  394-6,405. 
The  Commission  reported  (p.  64), '  We  see  no  reason  to  believe  that  there 
has  been  any  disloyalty  in  the  teaching  of  the  College,  or  any  disposition 
to  impair  the  obligations  of  an  unreserved  allegiance  to  your  Majesty.' 


APPENDIX  C. 


Compare  the  recent  and  ominous  forecasting  of  the 'future  European 
policy  of  the  British  Crown,  in  an  article  from  a  Romish  Periodical  for 
the  current  month,  which  has  direct  relation  to  these  matters,  and  which 
has  every  appearance  of  proceeding  from  authority: 

'Surely  in  any  European  complication,  such  as  may  any  day  arise,  nay, 
such  as  must  ere  long  arise,  from  the  natural  gravitation  of  the  forces, 
which  are  for  the  moment  kept  in  check  and  truce  by  the  necessity  of 
preparation  for  their  inevitable  collision,  it  may  very  well  be  that  the 

D 


50  APPENDICES. 

future  prosperity  of  England  may  be  staked  in  the  struggle,  and  that  the 
side  which  she  may  take  may  be  determined,  not  either  by  justice  or  in- 
terest, but  hy  a  passionate  resolve  to  keep  up  the  Italian  kingdom  at  any 
hazard.'*  —  The  Month  for  Kovember,  1874:  *Mr.  Gladstone's  Durham 
Letter,'  p.  265.  ^ 

This  is  a  remarkable  disclosure.  With  %chom  could  England  be 
brought  into  conflict  by  any  disposition  she  might  feel  to  keep  up  the 
Italian  kingdom?  Considered  as  States, both  Austria  and  France  are  in 
complete  harmony  with  Italy.  But  it  is  plain  that  Italy  has  some  en- 
emy ;  and  the  writers  of  the  Month  appear  to  know  who  it  is. 


APPENDIX  D. 


Notice  has  been  taken,  both  in  this  country  and  abroad,  of  the  appar- 
ent inertness  of  public  men,  and  of  at  least  one  British  Administration, 
with  respect  to  the  subject  of  these  pages.  See  Friedberg,  Grenzen 
zwischen  Staat  und  Kirche,  Abtheilung  iii.  pp.  755-6 ;  and  the  Preface  to 
the  Fifth  Volume  of  Mr.  Greenwood's  elaborate,  able,  and  judicial  work 
entitled  Cathedra  Petri,  p.  iv. 

If  there  be  any  chance  of  such  a  revival,  it  would  become  our  political 
leaders  to  look  more  closely  into  the  peculiarities  of  a  system  which  de- 
nies the  right  of  the  subject  to  freedom  of  thought  and  action  upon  mat- 
ters most  material  to  his  civil  and  religious  welfare.  There  is  no  mode 
of  ascertaining  the  spirit  and  tendency  of  great  institutions  but  in  a  care- 
ful study  of  their  history.  The  writer  is  profoundly  impressed  with  the 
conviction  that  our  political  instructors  have  wholly  neglected  this  im- 
portant duty;  or,  which  is  perhaps  worse,  left  it  in  the  hands  of  a  class 
of  persons  whose  zeal  has  outrun  their  discretion,  and  who  have  sought 
rather  to  engage  the  prejudices  than  the  judgment  of  their  hearers  in  the 
cause  they  have,  no  doubt  sincerely,  at  heart. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  YATICAI^  COUNCIL 


TOGETHER   WITH   THE   LATIN   AND   ENGLISH   TEXT   OF  THE 


PAPAL  SYLLABUS  AND  THE  VATICAN  DECREES. 


Rev.  PHILIP  SCHAFF,  D.D. 

FROM  HIS  FORTHCOMING  'HISTORY  OP  THE   CREEDS   OF   CHRISTENDOM, 


CONTENTS 


TAGE 

I.  A  History  of  the  Vatican  Council 51 

Literature 63 

Call  of  the  Council.    Its  Aim 55 

Opening  of  the  Council 58 

Attendance  and  CcTmposition . .  .  .• 59 

Rules.     Private  and  Public  Sessions 60 

Papal  Management  and  Control 61 

Proceedings 63 

Importance.    Claim  to  CEcumenicity 65 

The  Vatican  Decrees : 

'1.  The  Constitution  of  the  Catholic  Faith 66 

2.  The  Infallibility  Decree 69 

Papal  Infallibility  Explained  and  Tested 82 

Ultramontanism  and  Gallicanism 86 

Papal  Infallibility  and  Personal  Responsibility 88 

Papal  Infallibility  and  Tradition 90 

Papal  Infallibility  and  the  Bible 102 

II.  The  Papal  Syllabus  of  1864 109 

(In  Latin,  with  English  Translation.) 

III.  The  Dogmatic  Decrees  of  the  Vatican  Councii   of  1870..   131 
(In  Latin,  with  English  Translation.) 


;^  «  A  f{y* 

«'#    VMS 


HISTORY  OF  THE  YATICAN  COUNCIL. 


LITERATURE. 

I.  Works  peeoeuing  the  Council. 

Officielle  Actenstucke  zu  dem  von  Sr.  Heiligkeit  dem  Papste  Pius  IX.  nach  Horn  bervfenen  Oekumenischen 
Condi,  Berlin,  1S69  (pp.  189).  This  work  contains  the  Papal  Encyclica  of  18C4,  and  the  various  papal 
letters  and  official  documents  preparatory  to  the  Council,  in  Latin  and  German. 

Chronique  concernant  le  Prochain  Concile.  Tradxiction  revue  et  approuvee  de  la  Civiltd  cattolica  par  la 
correspondance  de  Rome,  Vol.  I.  Avant  le  Concile.  Rome,  Deuxieme  ed.  1869,  fol.  (pp.  192).  Begins  wiih 
the  Papal  letter  of  June  26, 1867. 

Henry  Euwarb  Manning  (Archbishop  of  Westminster) :  The  Centenary  of  St.  Peter  and  the  General 
Council.  A  Pastoral  Letter.  London,  186T.  Also  in  Italian  {tipog.  della  Civiltd  cattolica).  In  favor  of  In- 
fallibility. 

C,  H.  A.  Plantier  (Bishop  of  Nimes) :  Sicr  les  Conciles  generaux  d  Voccasion  de  celui  que  Sa  SnintetePie 
IX.  a  convoque  pour  le  8  decembre  prochain,  Nimes  et  Paris,  1869,  The  same  in  German :  Ueber  die  allge- 
meinen  Kirchenversammlungen,  translated  by  Th.  von  Lamezan,  Freiburg  im  Breisgau,  1S69.    Infallibilist. 

Magb.  Vict.  Aug.  Deouamps  (Archbishop  of  Malines) :  LHnfaillibilite  et  le  Concile  general,  2d  ed.,  Paris 
et  Malines,  1869.  German  translation :  Die  Un/ehlbarkeit  desPapstes  und  das  Allgemeine  Condi,  Mainz, 
1869.    Strong  Infallibilist. 

H.  L.  C.  Maret  (Dean  of  the  Theol.  Faculty  of  Paris) :  Du  Concile  general  et  de  la  paix  rcligieuse,  Paris, 
1869,  2  vols.    Against  Infallibility.    Has  since  recanted. 

W.  Emmanuel  Fbeiuerr  von  Ketteleb  (Bishop  of  Mayence) :  Das  Allgemeine  Condi  und  seine  Bedeu- 
tungfiir  unsere  Zeit,  4th  ed.  Mainz,  1869,    First  against,  now  in  favor  of  Infallibility. 

Dr.  Joseph  Fesslek  (Bishop  of  St.  Polten  and  Secretary  of  the  Vatican  Council,  d.  1872) :  Das  letztetmd 
das  ndchste  A  llgemdne  Condi,  Freiburg  im  Breisgau,  1869, 

F,  DuPANLoup  (Bishop  of  Orleans) :  Lettre  sur  le  futur  Concile  (Ecumenique,  in  French,  German,  and 
other  languages,  1869.  The  same  on  the  Infallibility  of  the  Pope.  First  against,  then  in  favor  of  the  new 
dogma. 

Der  Papst  und  das  Condi  von  Janus,  Leipzig,  1869,  Several  editions.  The  same  in  English :  The  Pope 
and  the  Council,  by  Janus,  London,  1869,  In  opposition  to  the  Jesuit  programme  of  the  Council,  from 
the  liberal  (old)  Catholic  stand-point ;  probably  the  joint  production  of  Profs.  Dollingeb,  FRiEDEiou, 
and  HoBEB,  of  the  University  of  Munich, 

Dr.  J.  Heroenrotueb  (R.  C.)  :  A  nti-Janus,  Freiburg  im  Breisgau,  1870.  Also  iu  English,  by  J.  B.  Rob- 
ertson, Dublin,  1870. 

Reform  der  R'htt.  Kirche  in  Haupt  und  Gliedern  Aufgabe  des  bevorstehenden  Rom.  Condla,  Leipz.  1869. 
[By  Prof,  VON  Suulte,  of  Prague,]    Liberal  Catholic. 

Felix  Bungener  (Prot,) :  Rome  and  the  Council  in  the  Nineteenth  Century.  Translated  from  the  French, 
with  additions  by  the  Author.  Ediub,  1870.  (Conjectures  as  to  what  the  Council  will  be,  to  judge  from  the 
Papal  Syllabus  and  the  past  history  of  the  Papacy.) 

II.  Reports  during  the  Council. 

The  Civiltd  catholica,  of  Rome,  for  1869  and  1870.    Chief  organ  of  the  Jesuits  and  Infallibilists. 

Louis  Veuillot:  Rome  pendant  le  Concile,  Paris,  1870,  2  vols.  Collection  of  his  correspondence  to 
his  journal,  VUnivers,  of  Paris.    Ultra-Infallibilist  and  utterly  unscrupulous. 

J.  Friedrich  (Prof,  of  Church  History  in  Munich,  lib,  Cath.) :  Tagebttch  wdhrend  des  VaticaniscJien  Con- 
oils  gefiihrt,  Nodlingen,  1871.  A  journal  kept  during  the  Council,  and  noting  the  facts,  projects,  and  ru- 
mors as  they  came  to  the  surface.  The  author,  a  colleague  and  intimate  friend  of  DiJllinger,  has  since 
been  excommunicated. 

Lord  Acton  (liberal  Catholic) :  Ziir  Geschichte  des  Vatican.  Condls,  first  published  in  the  North  Britinh 
Review  for  October,  1870  (under  the  title :  TheVatican  Council^  pp.  95-120  of  the  Amer.  reprint),  translated 
by  Dr.  Reischl,  at  Munich,  1871. 


54  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

QuiRiNUB :  Letters  from  Rome  on  the  Council,  first  in  the  Krxg^'b.  Allgemdne  Zeitting,  and  then  in  a  sep- 
arate volume,  Munich,  1S70;  also  in  English,  London,  1870  (pp.  856).  Letters  of  three  liberal  Catholics, 
of  different  nations,  who  had  long  resided  in  Kome,  and,  during  the  Council,  communicated  to  each 
other  all  the  information  they  could  gather  from  members  of  the  Council,  and  sent  their  letters  to  a 
friend  in  Germany  for  publication  in  the  Augsburg  General  Gazette. 

Compare  against  Quirinus:  Die  Unwahrheiten  der  Ri'miischen  Brief e  vom  Concil  in  der  Allg.  Zeitung, 
VON  W.  Emmanuel  Feeiheken  von  Kettelee  (Bishop  of  Mayence),  1870. 

Ce  qui  se  passe  au  Concile.    Dated  April  10, 1870.    Troisieme  ed.    Paris,  1870.    [By  Jules  Gaillaei>.] 

La  derniere  heure  dtc  Concile,  Paris,  1870.  [By  a  member  of  the  Council.]  The  last  two  works  were 
denounced  as  a  calumny  by  the  presiding  Cardinals  in  the  session,  July  16, 1870. 

Also  the  Reports  during  the  Council  in  the  Giornale  di  Roma,  the  Turin  Unitd  catholica,  the  London 
Times,  the  London  (R.  C.)  Tablet,  the  Dublin  Review,  the  New  York  Tribune,  and  other  leading  period- 
icals. 

IIL  TuE  Acts  and  PEOOEEniNcs  of  this  Council. 

(1.)  Roman  Catholic  (Infallibilist)  Sources. 

Acta  et  Decreta  sacrosancti  et  oecumenici  Concilii  Vaticani  die  8  Dec.  1869  a  ss.  D.  X.  Pio  IX.  inchoati. 
Cum  p9rmissione  superiorum,  Friburgi  Brisgoviae,  1871,  in  2  Parts.  The  first  part  contains  the  Papal 
Encyclica  with  the  Syllabus  and  the  acts  preparatory  to  the  Council ;  the  second,  the  public  acts  of  the 
Council  itself,  with  a  list  of  the  dioceses  of  the  Roman  Church  and  the  members  of  the  Vatican  Council. 

Actes  et  histoire  du  Concile  cecumenique  de  Rome,  premier  du  Vatican,  ed.  under  the  auspices  of  Victor 
Frond,  Paris,  1869  sqq.  6  vols.  Includes  extensive  biographies  of  Pope  Pius  IX.  and  his  Cardinals,  etc., 
with  portraits.  Vol.  VI.  contains  the  Actes,  decrets  et  documents  reccuillia  et  mis  en  ordrepar  M.  Pelletier, 
chanoine  d^  Orleans.    Each  vol.  costs  100  francs. 

A  tti  ufficialli  del  Concilio  ecumenico,  Turino,  pp.  682  (?  1870). 

Officielle  ActenstUcke  zu  dem  vo7i  Sr.  Heiligkeit  dem  Papst  Pius  IX.  nach  Rom  hervfenen  Oekumenischen 
Concil,  Zweite  Sammlung,  Berlin,  1S70. 

Das  Oekumenische  Concil.  Stimmen  aus  Maria-Laach,  Neue  Folge.  Freiburg  im  Breisgau,  1870.  A  se- 
ries of  discussions  in  defense  of  the  Council  by  Jesuits  (Florian  Riess,  and  K.  v.  Weber). 

Hkney  Edwaep  Manning  (R.  C.  Archbishop  of  Westminster) :  The  Vatican  Council  and  its  Definitions. 
A  Pastoral  Letter  to  his  Clergy.  London  and  New  York,  1871.  A  defense  of  the  two  Constitutions  of  the 
Council  de  fide  and  de  ecclesia.  This,  together  with  two  other  Pastoral  Letters  on  the  Council  (quoted 
p.  134),  are  also  publishad  in  one  volume  under  the  joint  title  Petri  Privilegium,  Lond.  1871. 

Bp.  Jos.  Fessler  (Secretary  of  the  Vatican  Council) :  Das  Vaticanische  Condi,  dessen  dtissere  Bedeutung 
und  innerer  Verlavf,  Wien,  1871. 

The  stenographic  reports  of  the  speeches  of  the  Council  are  still  locked  up  in  the  archives  of  the  Vat- 
ican. 

(2.)  Old  Catholic  (anti-Infallibilist). 

Jon.  FBiEnEion:  Documenta  ad  illustrandum  Concilium  Vaticanum  anni  1870,  Nordlingen,  1871,  in  2 
Parts.  Contains  oflScial  and  unofHcial  documents  bearing  on  the  Council  and  the  various  schemata  de 
fide,  de  ecclesia,  etc.  Compare  his  Tagebuch  loiihrend  des  Vaticanischen  Ccncils  gefiihrt,  above  quoted, 
and  his  Zur  Vertheidigung  meines  Tagebuchs.  Offener  Brief  an  P.  R.  Cornely,  Priester  der  Gesellschaft 
Jesu,  Nordl.  1872. 
^Joxi.  Fbiedeich  Rittee  von  SonuLTE  (Prof,  of  Canon  Law  in  the  University  of  Prague,  now  in  Bonn) : 
T)as  Unfehlbarkeitsdecret  vom,  18  Juli  1870  .  .  .  gepruft,  Prag,  1871.  Also,  Die  Macht  der  Rom.  Papste  iiber 
Fursten,  Lander,  Volker,  Individuen,  etc.,  Prag,  2d  ed.  1871. 

Stim'hien  aus  der  katholischen  Kirche  Hber  die  Kirchenfragen  der  Gegenwart,  Mi\nchen,1870  sqq.  2  vols. 
A  series  of  discussions  against  the  Vatican  Council,  by  Dollingeb,  Huueb,  Soiimitz,  Feieueicii,  Rbin- 
KEN8,  and  HiixzL. 

(3.)  Protestant. 

Dr.  Emil  FBiEnBEEG  (Prof,  of  Ecclesiastical  Law  in  Leipzig) :  Sammlung  der  ActenstUcke  zum  ersten 
Vaticanischen  Concil,  mit  eincm  Grundrvis  der  Geschichte  desselbcn,  Tubingen,  1872  (pp.  954).  Very  valu- 
able ;  contains  all  the  important  documents,  and  a  full  list  of  works  on  the  Council. 

TiiEon.  Feommann  {Privatdocent  in  Berlin):  Geschichte  und  Kritik  des  Vaticanischen  Concils  von  1869 
und  1870,  Gotha,  1872  (pp.  529). 

E.  t)E  Peessense  (Ref.  Pastor  in  Paris) :  Le  Concile  du  Vatican,  son  histoire  et  ses  consequences  politiqries 
et  religieuses,  Paris,  1S72.    Also  in  German,  by  Fabaritis,  Niirdlingen,  1872. 

L.  W.  Baoon  :  An  Inside  View  of  the  Vatican  Council,  New  York,  1872  (Amer.  Tract  Society).  Contains 
a  translation  of  Archbishop  Kenrick's  speech  against  Infallibility,  with  a  sketch  of  the  Council,  and 
several  documents. 

An  extensive  criticism  on  the  Infallibility  decree  in  the  third  edition  of  Dr.  Hase's  Handbuch  der  Prot- 
estant. Polemik  gegen  die  romisch-katholische  Kirche,  Leipz.  1871,  pp.  155-200.    Comp.  pp.  24-37. 

[The  above  are  only  the  most  important  works  of  the  large  and  increasing  literature,  historical,  apol- 
ogetic, and  polemic,  on  the  Vatican  Council.  A.  Erlecke,  in  a  pamphlet.  Die  Literatur  des  rom.  Concils, 
gives  a  list  of  over  200  books  and  pamphlets  which  appeared  in  Germ.any  alone  till  the  close  of  1870. 
Friedberg  notices  in  all  no  less  thau  1041  writings  on  the  subject  till  June  1872.  His  lists  are  classified 
and  very  accurate.] 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  55 

More  than  three  hundred  years  after  the  close  of  the  Council  of 
Trent,  Pope  Pius  IX.,  who  had  proclaimed  the  new  dogma  of  the 
Immaculate  Conception,  who  in  the  presence  of  five  hundred  Bishops  had 
celebrated  the  eighteenth  centennial  of  the  martyrdom  of  the  Apostles 
Peter  and  Paul,  and  who  was  permitted  to  sui-vive  not  only  the  golden 
wedding  of  his  priesthood,  but  even — alone  among  his  more  than  two 
hundred  and  fifty  predecessors — the  silver  wedding  of  his  popedom 
(thus  falsifying  the  tradition  'non  videhit  annos  Pe'trV),  resolved  to 
convoke  a  new  oecumenical  Council,  which  w^as  to  proclaim  his  own  in- 
fallibility in  all  matters  of  faith  and  discipline,  and  thus  to  put  the 
top-stone  to  the  pyramid  of  the  Eoman  hierarchy. 

He  first  intimated  his  intention,  June  26, 1867,  in  an  Allocution  to 
five  hundred  Bishops  who  were  assembled  at  the  eighteenth  centen- 
ary of  the  martyrdom  of  St.  Peter  in  Kome.  The  Bishops,  in  a  most 
humble  and  obsequious  response,  July  1,  1867,  approved  of  his  he- 
roic courage,  to  employ,  in  his  old  age,  an  extreme  measure  for  an 
extreme  danger,  and  predicted  a  new  splendor  of  the  Church,  and  a  new 
triumph  of  the  kingdom  of  God.^  Whereupon  the  Pope  announced  to 
them  that  he  would  convene  the  Council  under  the  special  auspices  of 
the  imnlaculate  Virgin,  who  had  crushed  the  serpent's  head  and  was 
mighty  to  destroy  alone  all  the  heresies  of  the  w^orld.^ 

*  ^  Summo  igitur  gnudio^''  said  the  five  hundred  Bishops,  ^repletus  est  animus  noster,  dum 
sacrato  ore  Tuo  intellexii/ms,  tot  inter  prcesentis  temporis  discrimina  eo  Te  esse  consilio,  tit 
^^rnaximum,^'  prout  aiehat  inclitus  Tuus  prcedecessor  Paulus  III.,  ''''in  vmxi.nis  rei  christi- 
ance  periculis  remediu7n,"  Concilium  oecumenicum  convoces.  Annuat  Deus  huic  Tuo  proposito, 
cuius  ipse  Tibi  mentem  inspiravit ;  habeantque  tandem  cevi  nostri  homines,  qui  injirmi  in  fide, 
semper  discentes  et  nunquain  ad  veritatis  agnitionem  pervenientes  omni  vento  doctrince  circum- 
feruntur,  in  sacrosancta  hac  Synodo  novani,  prcesentissimamque  occasionem  accedendi  ad  sanc- 
tum Ecclesiam  columnam  ac  Jirmamentum  venitatis,  cognoscendi  salutiferam  Jidem,  perniciosos 
reiiciendi  errores ;  ac  fiat,  Deo  propitio,  et  conciliatrice  Deipara  Immaculata,  hcec  Sy nodus 
grande  opus  unitatis,  sanctificationis  et  pads,  unde  novus  in  Ecclesiam  splendor  redundet,  novtis 
regni  Dei  triumphus  consequatur.  Et  hoc  ipso  Tuce  proiiidentice  opere  denuo  exibeatur  vmndo 
immensa  beneficia,  per  Pontificatum  romanum  humance  societati  asserta.  Pateat  cunctis,  Eccle- 
siam eo  quod  super  soUdissima  Petrafundetur,  tantum  valere,  ut  errores  depellat,  mores  c.orri- 
gat,  barbariem  compescat,  civilisque  humanitatis  mater  dicatur  et  sit.  Pateat  mundo,  quod 
divin(e  auctoritatis  et  debitce  eidem  obedientice  manifestissimo  specimine,  in  divina  Pontifica- 
tus  institutione  dato,  ea  omnia  stabilita  et  sacrata  sint,  quoe  societatum  fundamenta  ac  diutur- 
nitatem  solident.' 

'  '  Quod  sane  votum  apertius  etiam  se  prodit  in  eo  communi  Concilii  oecumenici  desiderio, 
quod  omnes  non  modo  perutile,  sed  et  necessarium  arbitramini.  Superbia  enim  humana,  vete- 
rem  ansum  instauratura,  jamdiu  per  commenticium  progressum  civitatem  et  turrein  extruere 
nititur,  cujtis  culmen  pertingat  ad  codum,  unde  demum  Detis  ipse  detrahi  possit.  At  is  de- 
scendisse  videtur  inspecturus  opus,  et  cedificantium  linguas  ita  cor>fusurtis,  ut  non  audiat  unus- 


56  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCm 

The  call  was  issued  by  an  Encyclical,  commencing  jEterni  Patris 
Uaigenitus  Filius,  in  the  twenty-third  year  of  his  Pontificate,  on  the 
feast  of  St.  Peter  and  Paul,  Jnne  29, 1868.  It  created  at  once  a  uni- 
versal commotion  in  the  Christian  world,  and  called  forth  a  multitude 
of  books  and  pamphlets  even  before  the  Council  convened.  The  high- 
est expectations  were  suspended  by  the  Pope  and  his  sympathizers  on 
the  comino^  event.     What  the  Council  of  Trent  had  effected  as^ainst 

O  CD 

the  Protestant  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century,  the  Council  of  the 
Vatican  was  to  accomplish  against  the  more  radical  and  dangerous  foes 
of  modern  liberalism  and  rationalism,  which  threatened  to  undermine 
Romanism  itself  in  its  own  strongholds.  It  was  to  crush  the  power  of 
infidelity,  and  to  settle  all  that  belongs  to  the  doctrine,  worship,  and 
discipline  of  the  Church,  and  the  eternal  salvation  of  souls.^  It  was 
even  hoped  that  the  Council  might  become  a  general  feast  of  recon- 
ciliation of  divided  Christendom;  and  lience  the  Greek  schismatics, 


quisque  voceyn  proximi  sui :  id  enim  animo  ohj;ciunt  Ecclesice  vexationes,  miseranda  civilis  con- 
sortii  conditio,  perturhatio  rerum  omnium,  in  tjua  versamur.  Cm  sane  gravisslmce  calamitati sola 
certe  ohjici  potest  divina  Ecclesice  virtus,  qace  tunc  viaxime  se  prodit,  cum  Episcopi  a  Sum- 
mo  Pontijice  convocati,  eo  procside,  conveni^mt  in  noniine  Domini  de  Ecclesice  rebus  acturi. 
Et  gaudemus  omnino,  prcevertisse  vos  hac  in  re  propositum  jamdiu  a  nobis  conceptum,  com- 
viendandl  sacrum  hunc  coetum  ejus  patrocinio,  cujus  pedi  a  rerum  exordia  serpentis  caput  sub- 
jectumfuit,  quceque  deinde  universas  hcereses  sola  interemit.  Satisfacturi  propterea  communi 
desiderio  jam  nunc  nunciamus,  futurum  quandocunque  Concilium  sub  auspiciis  Deiparce  Virgi- 
nis  ab  omni  labe  immunis  esse  constituendum,  et  eo  apeiriendum  die,  quo  insignis  hujus  privilegii 
ipsi  coUati  memoria  recolitur.  Faxit  Deus,faxit  Immaculata  Virgo,  ut  a7n])lissimos  e  saluber- 
rimo  isto  Conciliofructus  percipere  valeamus.'  While  the  Pope  complains  of  the  pride  of  the 
age  in  attempting  to  build  another  tower  of  Babel,  it  did  not  occur  to  him  that  the  assump- 
tion of  infallibility,  i.  e.,  a  predicate  of  the  Almighty  by  a  mortal  man,  is  the  consummation 
of  spiritual  pride. 

*  After  describing,  in  the  stereotyped  phrases  of  the  Roman  Court,  the  great  solicitude  of 
the  successors  of  Peter  for  pure  doctrine  and  good  gOAernment,  and  the  terrible  tempests  and 
calamities  by  which  the  Catholic  Church  and  the  very  foundations  of  society  are  shaken  in 
the  present  age,  the  Pope's  Encyclical  comprehensively  but  vaguely,  and  with  a  prudent  re- 
serve concerning  the  desired  dogma  of  Infallibility,  defines  the  objects  of  the  Council  in  these 
words  :  '/«  cecumenico  hoc  Concilio  ea  omnia  accuratissime  examine  sunt  perpendenda  ac  sta- 
tuenda,  quce  hisce  prcesertim  asperrimis  temporibus  majorem  Dei  gloriam,  etjidei  itrtegritatem, 
divinique  cultus  decorem,  sempiternamque  hominum  salutem,  et  utriusque  Cleri  disciplinam 
ejusque  salutarem  solidamque  culturam,  atque  ecclesiasticarum  legum  observantiam,  morumque 
emendationem,  et  christianam  juventutis  institutionem,  et  communem  omnium  pacem  et  concor- 
diam  in  primis  respiciunt.  Atque  etiam  intentissimo  studio  curandum  est,  ut,  Deo  beneju- 
rante,  ovinia  ab  Ecclesia  et  civili  societate  amoveantur  mala,  ut  miseri  errantes  ad  rectum 
veritatis,  justitice  salutisque  tramitem  reducantur,ut  vitiis  erroribusque  eliminatis,  augusta  nos- 
tra religio  ejusque  salutijera  doctrina  ubique  terrarum  reviviscat,  et  quotidie  magis  propagetur 
et  dominetur,  atque  ita  jnetas,  honestas,  probitas,  jtistitia,  carifas  omnesque  Christiance  vir- 
tutes  cum  maxima  humance  socieiatis  utilitate  vigeant  et  ej/lorescant.' 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  57 

and  the  Protestant  heretics  and  other  non-Cathoh'cs,  were  invited  by 
two  special  letters  of  the  Pope  (Sept.  8,  and  Sept.  13, 1868)  to  return 
on  this  auspicious  occasion  to  '  the  only  sheepfold  of  Christ,'  for  the 
salvation  of  their  souls.^ 

But  the  Eastern  Patriarchs  spurned  the  invitation,  as  an  insult  to 
their  time-honored  rights  and  traditions,  from  which  they  could  not 
depai*t.2  The  Protestant  communions  either  ignored  or  respectfully 
declined  it.^ 

Thus  the  Vatican  Council,  like  that  of  Trent,  turned  out  to  be  sim- 
ply a  general  Eoman  Council,  and  apparently  put  the  prospect  of  a 
reunion  of  Christendom  farther  off  than  ever  before. 

While  these  sanguine  expectations  of  Pius  IX.  were  doomed  to  dis- 
appointment, the  chief  object  of  the  Council  w^as  attained  in  spite  of 
the  strong  opposition  of  the  minority  of  liberal  Catholics.  This  object, 
which  for  reasons  of  propriety  is  omitted  in  the  bull  of  convocation  and 
other  preliminary  acts,  but  clearly  stated  by  the  organs  of  the  Ultra- 
montane or  Jesuitical  party,  was  nothing  less  than  the  proclamation  of 

*  '  Omnes  Christianos  etiam  atque  etiam  hortamur  et  ohsecramus,  xit  ad  unicum  Christi  oinle 
redirefestinent.^  And  at  the  end  again, '  unum  ovile  et  unus  pastor;^  according  to  the  false  and 
mischievous  translation  of  John  x.  16  in  the  Vulgate  (followed  by  the  authorized  English 
Version),  instead  of  ^ one  Jlock'  (fiia  Troifivr],  not  auXij).  There  may  be  many  folds,  and  yet 
one  flock  under  one  Shepherd,  as  there  are  '  many  mansions'  in  heaven  (John  xiv,  2). 

^  The  Patriarch  of  Constantinople  declined  even  to  receive  the  Papal  letter  from  the  Papal 
messenger,  for  the  reasons  that  it  had  already  been  publishecf  in  the  Giornale  di  Roma ;  tl.at 
it  contained  principles  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  the  Gospel,  the  doctrines  of  the  oecumenical 
Councils,  and  the  holy  Fathers ;  that  there  was  no  supreme  Bishop  in  the  Church  except 
Christ;  and  that  the  Bishop  of  Old  Rome  had  no  right  to  convoke  an  oecumenical  Council 
without  first  consulting  the  Eastern  Patriarchs.  The  other  Oriental  Bishops  either  declined 
or  returned  the  Papal  letter  of  invitation.  See  the  documents  in  Eriedberg,  1.  c.  pp.  233-2a3 ; 
in  OfficielleAcienstucke,  etc.,  pp.  127-135  ;  and  ml\\QChromque  concernant  le  Prochain  Con- 
cile,  Vol.  I.  pp.  3  sqq.,  103  sqq, 

^  The  Evangelical  OUrkirchenrath  of  Berlin,  the  Kirchentag  of  Stuttgart,  1869,  the  Paris 
Branch  of  the  Evangelical  Alliance,  'The  Venerable  Company  of  Pastors  of  Geneva,'  the 
Professorc  of  the  University  of  Groningen,  the  Hungarian  Lutherans  assembled  at  Pesth,  and 
the  Presbyterians  of  the  United  States,  took  notice  of  the  Papal  invitation,  all  declining  it,  and 
reaffirming  the  principles  of  the  Protestant  Reformation.  The  Presbyterian  Dr.  Cumming, 
of  London,  seemed  willing  to  accept  the  invitation  if  the  Pope  would  allow  a  discussion  of  the 
reasons  of  the  separation  from  Rome,  but  was  informed  by  the  Pope,  through  Archbishop 
Manning,  in  two  letters  (Sept.  4,  and  Oct.  30,  1869),  that  such  discussion  of  questions  long 
settled  would  be  entirely  inconsistent  with  the  infallibility  of  the  Church  and  the  supremacy 
of  the  Holy  See.  See  the  documents  in  Eriedberg,  pp.  235-2,57 ;  comp.  pp.  16,  17,  and  Offic. 
Actenstiicke,  pp  158-176.  The  Chronique  concernant  le  Prochain  Concile,  p.  169,  criticises 
at  length  the  American  Presbyterian  letter  signed  by  Jacobus  and  Fowler  (Moderators  of  the 
General  Assembly),  and  sees  in  its  reasons  for  declining  a  proof  of  'heretical  obstinacy  and 
ignorance. ' 


58  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

the  personal  Infallibility  of  the  Pope,  as  a  binding  article  of  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  faith  for  all  time  to  come.^  Herein  lies  the  whole  im- 
portance of  the  Council;  all  the  rest  dwindles  into  insignificance, and 
could  never  have  justified  its  convocation. 

After  extensive  and  careful  preparations,  the  first  (and  perhaps  the 
last)  Yatican  Council  was  solemnly  opened  amid  the  sound  of  innu- 
merable bells  and  the  cannon  of  St.  Angelo,  but  under  frowning  skies 
and  a  pouring  rain,  on  the  festival  of  the  Immaculate  Conception  of  the 
Virgin  Mary,  Dec.  8, 1869,  in  the  Basilica  of  the  Vatican.-  It  reached 
its  height  at  the  fourth  public  session,  July  18, 1870,  when  the  decree 
of  Papal  Infallibility  was  proclaimed.  After  this  it  dragged  on  a  sickly 
existence  till  October  20,  1870,  when  it  w^as  adjourned  till  Xov.  11, 
1870,  but  indefinitely  postponed  on  account  of  the  extraordinary  change 
in  the  political  situation  of  Europe.  For  on  the  second  of  September 
the  French  Empire,  which  had  been  the  'main  support  of  the  temporal 
power  of  the  Pope,  collapsed  with  the  surrender  of  Kapoleon  III.,  at 
the  old  Huguenot  stronghold  of  Sedan,  to  the  Protestant  King  William 
of  Prussia,  and  on  the  twentieth  of  September  the  Italian  troops,  in  the 

*  So  the  Civilta  cattolica  (a  monthly  Review  established  1  SnO,  at  Rome,  the  principal  organ 
of  the  Jesuits,  and  the  Moniteur  of  the  Papal  Court)  defined  the  programme,  Feb.  6, 1869 ;  add- 
ing to  it  also  the  adoption  of  the  Syllabus  of  18G4,  and,  perha[)S,  the  proc  lamation  of  the  as- 
sumption of  the  Virgin  Mary  to  heaven.  The  last  is  reserved  for  the  future.  The  Archbishop 
of  Westminster  (Manning)  and  the  Archbishop  of  Mechlin  (Dechamps)  predicted,  in  pastoral 
letters  of  1867  and  1869,  the  proclamation  of  the  Papal  Infallibility  as  a  certain  event.  To 
avert  this  danger,  the  Bishop  of  Orleans  (Dupanloup),  Pere  Gratry  of  the  Oratory,  Pere 
Ilyacinthe,  Bishop  Maret  (Dean  of  the  Theological  Faculty  of  Paris),  Montalembert,  John 
Henry  Newman,  the  German  Catholic  laity  (in  the  Coblenz  Address),  in  part  the  German 
Bishops  assembled  at  Fulda,  and  especially  the  learned  authors  of  the  Janus,  lifted  their 
voice,  though  in  vain.     See  the  literature  on  the  subject  in  Friedberg,  pp.  17-21. 

2  Hence  the  name.  The  right  cross-nave  of  St.  Peter's  Church,  which  itself  is  a  large 
church,  was  separated  by  a  painted  board  wall,  and  fitted  up  as  the  council-hall.  See  a 
draught  of  it  in  Friedberg,  p.  98.  The  hall  was  very  unsuitable  for  hearing,  and  had  to  be 
repeatedly  altered.  The  Pope,  it  is  said  (Hase,  1.  c.  p.  26),  did  not  ca.e  that  all  the  orators 
should  be  understood.  The  Vatican  Palace,  where  the  Pope  now  resides,  adjoins  the  Church 
of  St.  Peter.  Councils  were  held  there  before,  but  only  of  a  local  character.  Formerly  the  Ro- 
man oecumenical  Councils  were  held  in  the  Lateran  Palace,  the  ancient  residence  of  the 
Popes,  which  is  connected  with  the  Church  of  St.  John  in  the  Lateran  or  Church  of  the 
Saviour  (^omnium  urbis  et  orhis  ecclesiarum  mater  et  caput').  There  are  five  Lateran  Coun- 
cils :  the  first  was  held,  II 23,  under  Calixtus  II. ;  the  second,  1139,  under  Innocent  II. ;  the 
third,  1179,  under  Alexander  III. ;  the  fourth  and  largest,  1215,  under  Innocent  III.  ;  the 
fifth,  1512-1517,  under  Leo  X.,  on  the  eve  of  the  Reformation.  The  basilica  of  the  Late- 
ran contains  the  head,  the  basilica  of  St.  Peter  the  body,  of  St.  Peter,  The  Pope  expressed 
the  hope  that  a  special  inspiration  would  proceed  from  the  near  grave  of  the  prince  of  the  Apos^ 
ties  upon  the  Fathers  of  the  Council. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  59 

name  of  King  Victor  Emanuel,  took  possession  of  Rome,  as  the  future 
capital  of  united  Italy.  Whether  the  Council  will  ever  he  convened 
again  to  complete  its  vast  labors,  like  the  twice  interrupted  Council  of 
Trent,  remains  to  be  seen.  But,  in  proclaiming  the  personal  Infallibil- 
ity of  the  Pope,  it  made  all  future  oecumenical  Councils  unnecessary 
for  the  definition  of  dogmas  and  the  regulation  of  discipline,  so  that 
hereafter  they  will  be  expensive  luxuries  and  empty  ritualistic  shows. 
The  acts  of  the  Vatican  Council,  as  far  as  they  go,  are  irrevocable. 

The  attendance  was  larger  than  that  of  any  of  its  eighteen  predeces- 
sors,^ and  presented  .an  imposing  array  of  hierarchical  dignity  and 
power  such  as  the  world  never  saw  before,  and  as  the  Eternal  City  itself 
is  not  likely  ever  to  see  again.  What  a  contrast  this  to  the  first  Coun- 
cil of  the  apostles,  elders,  and  brethren  in  an  upper  chamber  in  Jerusa- 
lem !  The  whole  number  of  prelates  of  the  Eoman  Catholic  Church, 
who  are  entitled  to  a  seat  in  an  oecumenical  Council,  is  one  thousand 
and  thirty-seven. 2  Of  these  there  were  present  at  the  opening  of  the 
Council  719,  viz.,  49  Cardinals,  9  Patriarchs,  4  Primates,  121  Arch- 
bishops, 479  Bishops,  57  Abbots  and  Generals  of  monastic  orders.^ 
This  number  afterwards  increased  to  764,  viz.,  49  Cardinals,  10  Pa- 
triarchs, 4  Primates,  105  diocesan  Archbishops,  22  Archbishops  in  parti- 
bus  infidelium,  424  diocesan  Bishops,  98  Bishops  in  partibus,  and  52 

Abbots,  and  Generals  of  monastic  orders.'^  Distributed  according  to  con- 

t 

*  As  the  oecumenical  character  of  two  or  three  Councils  is  disputed,  the  Vatican  Council  is 
variously  reckoned  as  the  1 9th  or  20th  or  21st  oecumenical  Council;  by  strict  Romanists  (as 
Manning)  as  the  19th.     Compare  note  on  p.  91. 

^  See  a  full  list,  with  all  the  titles,  in  the  Lexicon  ^geographicum  added  to  the  second  part 
of  the  Acta  et  Decretcy  sacrosancti  et  oecum.  Cone.  Vaticani,  Friburgi,  1871.  The  Prelates 
^  quibus  aut  jus  aut  privilegium  fuit  sedendi  in  occumenica  synodo  Vaticana,'  are  arranged  as 
follows : 

(1.)  Eminentissimi  et  reverendissimi  Domini  S.E.  Rom.  Cardinales  :  (a)  ordinis  Episco- 
porum,  (b)  ordinis  Presbyterorum,  (c)  ordinis  diaconorum — 51. 

(2.)  Reverendissimi  Domini  Patriarchs — 11. 

(3.)  Reverendissimi  DD.  Primates— 10. 

(4.)  Reverendissimi  DD.  Archiepiscopi — 166. 

(5.)  Reverendissimi  DD.  Episcopi — 740. 

(6.)  AiJBATES  nuUius  dioceseos — 6. 

(7.)  Abbates  Generales  ordinum  monasticorum — 23. 

(8.)  Generales  et  Vicarii  Generales  congregationum  clericorum  regularium,  ordinum 
monasticorum,  ordinum  mendicantium — 29.     In  all,  1037. 

"  See  the  list  of  names  in  Friedberg,  pp.  376-394. 

*  See  the  official  Catalogo  alfabetico  del  Padri  jpresenti  al  Concilio  ecumenico  Vaticano^ 
Roma,  1870. 


60  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

tinents,  541  of  these  belonged  to  Europe,  83  to  Asia,  14  to  Africa,  113  to 
America,  13  to  Oceanica.  At  the  proclamation  of  the  decree  of  Papal 
Infallibility,  July  18, 1870,  the  number  was  reduced  to  535,  and  after- 
wards it  dwindled  down  to  200  or  180. 

Among  the  many  nations  represented,^  the  Italians  had  a  vast  ma- 
jority of  276,  of  whom  143  belonged  to  the  former  Papal  States  alone. 
France,  with  a  much  larger  Catholic  population,  had  only  84,  Austria 
and  Hungary  48,  Spain  41,  Great  Britain  35,  Germany  19,  the  United 
States  48,  Mexico  10,  Switzerland  8,  Belgium  6,  Holland  4,  Portugal 
2,  Russia  1.  Tlie  disproportion  between  the  representatives  of  the  dif- 
ferent nations  and  tlie  number  of  their  constituents  w^as  overwhelm- 
ingly in  favor  of  the  Papal  influence.  More  than  one-half  of  the 
Fathers  were  entertained  during  the  Council  at  the  expense  of  the  Pope. 

The  Eomans  themselves  were  remarkably  indifferent  to  the  Council, 
though  keenly  alive  to  the  financial  gain  which  the  dogma  of  the  In- 
fallibility of  their  sovereign  would  bring  to  the  Eternal  City  and  the 
impoverislied  Papal  treasury.^  It  is  well  known  how  soon  after  the 
Council  they  votfed  almost  in  a  body  against  the  temporal  power  of  the 
Pope,  and  for  their  new  master. 

The  strictest  secresy  was  enjoined  upon  the  members  of  the  Council.^ 
The  stenographic  reports  of  the  proceedings  were  locked  up  in  the 
archives.  Tlie  world  was  only  to  know  the  final  results  as  proclaimed 
in  the  public  sessions,  until  it  should  please  the  Roman  court  to  issue 
an  ofiicial  history.  But  the  freedom  of  tlie  press  in  the  nineteenth 
century,  the  elements  of  discord  in  the  Council  itself,  the  enterprise  or 
indiscretion  of  members  and  friends  of  both  parties,  frustrated  the 
precautions.  The  principal  facts,  documents,  speeches,  plans,  and  in- 
trigues leaked  out  in  the  official  schemata^  the  controversial  pamphlets 
of  Prelates,  and  the  private  reports  and  letters  of  outside  observers 
who  were  in  intimate  and  constant  intercourse  with  their  friends  in 
the  Council.* 


*  Manning  says,  '  some  thirty  nations' — probably  an  exaggeration. 
^  Quirinus,  pp.  480,  481  (English  translation). 

^  They  had  to  promise  and  swear  to  observe  '  mviolabilem  secreti  Jidem^  with  regard  to  the 
discussions,  the  opinions,  and  all  matters  pertaining  to  the  Council.  See  the* form  of  the  oath 
in  Friedberg,  p.  06.  In  ancient  Councils  the  people  are  often  mentioned  as  being  present 
during  the  deliberations,  and  manifesting  their  feelings  of  approval  and  disapproval. 

*  Among  the  irresponsible  but  well-infoiined  reporters  and  correspondents  must  be  men- 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  61 

The  subject-matter  for  deliberation  was  divided  into  four  parts :  on 
Faith,  Discipline,  Eeligious  Orders,  and  on  Rites,  including  Missions. 
Each  part  was  assigned  to  a  special  Commission  {Congregatio  ov  Be- 
putatio),  consisting  of  24  Prelates  elected  bj  ballot  for  the  whole  pe- 
riod of  the  Council,  with  a  presiding  Cardinal  appointed  by  the  Pope. 
These  Commissions  prepared  the  decrees  on  the  basis  of  schemata  pre- 
viously drawn  up  by  learned  divines  and  canonists,  and  confidentially 
submitted  to  the  Bishops  in  print.^  The  decrees  were  then  discussed, 
revised,  and  adopted  in  secret  sessions  by  the  General  Congregation 
(Congregationes  ^^Ti^T-aZ^^),  including  all  the  Fathers,  with  five  pre- 
siding Cardinals  appointed  by  the  Pope.  The  General  Congregation 
held  eighty-nine  sessions  in  all.  Finally,  the  decrees  thus  matured  were 
voted  upon  by  simple  yeas  or  nays  {Placet  or  Non  Placet),  and  sol- 
emnly promulgated  in  public  sessions  in  the  presence  and  by  the  au- 
thority of  the  Pope.  A  conditional  assent  {Placet  juxta  modum)  was 
allowed  in  the  secret,  but  not  in  the  public  sessions. 

There  were  only  four  such  public  sessions  held  during  the  ten  months 
of  the  Council,  viz.,  the  opening  session  (lasting  nearly  seven  hours), 
Dec.  8, 1869,  which  was  a  mere  formality,  but  of  a  ritualistic  splendor 
and  magnificence  such  as  can  be  gotten  up  nowhere  on  earth  but  in 
St.  Peter's  Cathedral  in  Eome ;  the  second  session,  Jan.  6, 1870,  when 
the  Fathers  simply  professed  each  one  before  the  Pope  the  Nicene 
Creed  and  the  Profession  of  the  Tridentine  Faith ;  the  third  session, 
April  24, 1870,  when  the  dogmatic  constitution  on  the  Catholic  faith 
was  unanimously  adopted ;  and  the  fourth  session,  July  18, 1870,  when 
the  first  dogmatic  constitution  on  the  Church  of  Christ  and  the  In- 
fallibility of  the  Pope  was  adopted  with  two  dissenting  votes. 

The  management  of  the  Council  was  entirely  in  the  hands  of  the 
Pope  and  his  dependent  Cardinals  and  Jesuitical  advisers.     He  origi- 

tioned  especially  the  writers  in  the  Civilta  cotfolica,  and  the  Paris  Univers^  on  the  part  of 
the  Infallibilists ;  and  the  pseudonymous  Quirinus,  Prof.  Friedrich,  and  the  anonymous 
French  authors  of  Ce  qui  se  passe  au  Concile,  and  of  La  derniere  heure  du  Concile,  on  the 
part  of  the  anti-Infallibilists. 

^  There  were  in  all  forty-five  schemata,  divided  into  four  classes  :  (1)  circa  Jidem,  (2)  circa 
disciplinam  ecclesio',  (3)  circa  ordines  regulares,  (4)  circa  res  ritus  orientalis  et  apostoHcas 
rnissiones.  See  a  list  in  Friedberg,  pp.  432-434.  Only  a  part  of  the  schemata  were  submit- 
ted, and  only  the  first  two  schemata  defide  were  acted  upon.  Friedrich,  in  the  Second  Part 
of  his  Documeiita,  gives  the  schemata,  as  far  as  they  were  distributed  among  the  Bishops,  ^O" 
gether  with  the  revisions.and  criticisms  of  the  Bishops. 


62  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

nated  the  topics  which  were  to  be  acted  on ;  he  selected  the  prepara- 
tory committees  of  theologians  (mostly  of  the  Ultramontane  school) 
who,  during  the  winter  of  1868-69,  drew  np  the  schemata ;  he  ap- 
pointed the  presiding  officers  of  the  four  Deputations,  and  of  the  Gen- 
eral Congregation;  and  he  proclaimed  the  decrees  in  his  own  name, 
*  with  the  approval  of  the  Council.'^  He  provided,  by  the  bull  ^  Cum 
Bomanis  Pontificibiis^  of  Dec.  4, 1869,  for  the  immediate  suspension 
and  adjournment  of  the  Council  in  case  of  his  death.  He  even  person- 
ally interfered  during  the  proceedings  in  favor  of  his  new  dogma  by 
praising  Infallibilists,  and  by  ignoring  or  rebuking  anti-Infallibilists.^ 
The  discussion  could  be  virtually  arrested  by  the  presiding  Cardinals 
at  the  request  of  only  ten  members ;  we  say  virtually,  for  although  it 
required  a  vote  of  the  Council,  a  majority  was  always  sure.  The  revised 
order  of  business,  issued  Feb.  22, 1870,  departed  even  from  the  old  rule 
requiring  absolute  or  at  least  moral  unanimity  in  definitions  of  faith 
(according  to  the  celebrated  canon  quod  sem/per,  quod  ubiqice^  quod  ah 
omnibus  credituvi  est),  and  substituted  for  it  a  mere  numerical  major- 
ity, in  order  to  secure  the  triumph  of  the  Infallibility  decree  in  spite  of 
a  powerful  m'inority.  Nothing  could  be  printed  in  Rome  against  In- 
fallibility, while  the  organs  of  Infallibility  had  full  freedom  to  print 

^  Under  the  title :  Pius  episcopus,  servus  servorwn  Dei,  sacro  approhante  Concilio,  ad  per- 
petuam  rei  memoriam.  The  order  prescribed  for  voting  was  this  :  The  Pope,  through  the  Sec- 
retary, asked  the  members  of  the  Council  first  in  general :  Recerendissimi  Patres,  placentne 
vohis  Deci^eta  et  Canones  qui  in  hac  Constitutione  continentur?  Then  each  one  was  called  by 
name,  and  must  vote  either  placet  or  no7i  placet.  When  the  votes  were  collected  and  brought 
to  the  Pope,  he  announced  the  result  by  this  formula :  Decreta  et  Canones  qui  in  Constitu- 
tione modo  lecta  continentur,  placuerunt  omnibus  Patribus,  nemine  dissentiente  [if  there  were 
dissenting  votes  the  Pope  stated  their  number] ;  Nosque,  sacro  approbante  Concilio,  ilia 
[sc.  decreta']  et  illos  [canones~\,  ita  ut  lecta  sunt,  dejinimus,  et  Apostolica  Auctoritate  conjir- 
nuvnus.     See  the  Monitum  in  the  Giornale  di  Rovia,  April  18, 1870;  Friedberg,  pp.  462-464. 

'  See  the  laudatory  letters  of  Pius  to  several  advocates  of  Infallibility,  in  Friedberg,  pp.  487- 
495 ;  comp.  pp.  108-1  ll.  To  Archbishop  Dechamps,  of  Mechlin,  he  wrote  that,  in  his  tract 
on  Papal  Infallibility,  he  had  proved  the  harmony  of  the  Catholic  faith  with  human  reason 
so  convincingly  as  to  force  even  the  Rationalists  to  see  the  absurdity  of  the  opposite  views. 
He  applauded  the  indefatigable  and  abusive  editor  of  the  Paris  Univers,  Veuillot,  who  had  col- 
lected 100,000  francs  for  the  Vicar  of  Christ  (May  30, 1870).  On  the  other  hand,  he  is  re- 
ported to  have  rebuked  in  conversation  Cardinal  Schwarzenberg  by  the  remark:  'I,  John 
Maria  Mastai,  believe  in  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope.  As  Pope  I  have  nothing  to  ask  from 
the  Council.  The  Holy  Ghost  will  enlighten  it.'  He  even  attacked  the  memory  of  the  elo- 
quent French  champion  of  Catholic  interests,  the  Count  Montalembert,  who  died  during  the 
Council  (March  13,  1870),  by  saying,  in  the  presence  of  three  hundred  persons :  '  He  had  a 
great  enemy,  pride.  He  was  a  liberal  Catholic,  i.  e.,  a  half  Catholic'  Ce  qui  se  passe  au 
Concile,  154  sqq. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  ^3 

and  publish  what  they  pleased.^  Such  prominence  of  the  Pope  is  char- 
acteristic of  a  Council  convoked  for  the  very  pui-pose  of  proclaiming 
his  personal  infallibility,  but  is  without  precedent  in  history  (except  in 
some  mediaeval  Councils) ;  even  the  Council  of  Trent  maintained  its 
own  dignity  and  comparative  independence  by  declaring  its  decrees  in 
its  own  name.^ 

This  want  of  freedom  of  the  Council — not  to  speak  of  the  strict 
police  surveillance  over  the  members — was  severely  censured  by  lib- 
eral Catholics.  More  than  one  hundred  Prelates  of  all  nations  signed 
a  strong  protest  (dated  Kome,  March  1,  1870)  against  the  order  of 
business,  especially  against  the  mere  majority  vote,  and  expressed  the 
fear  that  in  the  end  the  authority  of  this  Council  might  be  impaired  as 
wanting  in  truth  and  liberty — a  calamity  so  direful  in  these  uneasy 
times,  that  a  greater  could  not  be  imagined.  But  this  protest,  like 
all  the  acts  of  the  minority,  was  ignored. 

The  proceedings  were,  of  course,  in  the  official  language  of  the  Ro- 
man Church,  which  all  Prelates  could  understand  and  speak,  but.  very 
few  with  sufficient  ease  to  do  justice  to  themselves  and  their  subjects. 
The  acoustic  defects  of  the  Council-hall  and  the  difference  of  pronun- 
ciation proved  a  great  inconvenience,  and  the  Continentals  complained 

*  Several  minority  documents,  as  Kenrick's  speech  against  Infallibility,  and  the  Latin  edi- 
tion of  Hefele's  tract  on  Honorius,  were  printed  in  Naples;  the  German  in  Tiibingen.  But 
the  Civilta  cattoUca,  the  irresponsible  organ  of  tlie  Jesuits  and  the  Pope,  was  provided  with  a 
special  building  and  income,  and  every  facility  for  obtaining  information.  See  Acton,  Quiri- 
nus,  and  Frommann  (1.  c.  p.  13). 

^  ^  Sacrosancta  Tridentina  Synodus,  in  Spiritu  Sancto  legitime  congregata  .  .  .  declarat.* 
See  the  order  of  the  Council  of  Trent  as  republished  in  Fri^drich's  Documenta,  I.  pp.  265  sqq; 

^  '/g?  autetii,  quod  spectat  ad  nu.nerum  suffragiorum  requisitum,  tit  qucestiones  dogniaticce 
solvantur,  in  quo  quidem  rei  summa  est  totiusque  Concilii  cardo  vertitur,  ita  grave  est,  ut  nisi 
admitteretur,  quod  reverenter  et  enixe  postularnus,  conscientia  nostra  intolerabili pondere  preme- 

tur :  timeremus,  ne  Concilii  cecumenici  character  in  dubium  vocari  posset ;  ne  ansa  hostibus 
proeberetur  Sanctam  Sedem  et  Concilium  impetendi,  sicque  demum  opud' populum  Christianuvi 
hujus  Concilii  auctoritas  labejactar.etur,  quasi  veritate  et  libertate  caruerit:  quod  his  turba- 
tissimis  temporibus  tanta  esset  calamitas,  ut  pejor  excogitari  nulla  possit.^  See  the  remarkable 
protest  in  Friedberg,  pp.  417-422.  Also  Bollinger's  critique  of  the  order  of  business,  ib.  422- 
482 ;  Archbishop  Kenrick's  famous  concio  habenda  at  non  habita,  published  in  Naples,  1870 
(and  republished  in  Friedrich's  Docuin.);  the  work  La  liberie  du  Concile  et  rinfaillibilit€j 
which  was  either  written  or  inspired  by  Archbishop  Darboy,  of  Paris  (in  Friedrich's  Docum, 
I.  pp.  129  sqq.),  and  the  same  Prelate's  speech  in  the  General  Congregation,  May  20,  1870 
{ibidem,  II.  pp.  415  sqq.).  Archbishop  Manning,  sublimely  ignoring  all  these  facts  and  docu- 
ments, and  referring  us  to  the  inaccessible  Archives  of  the  Vatican,  assures  us  (Petri  Privil. 
III.  32)  that  the  Council  was  as  free  as  the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  and  that  the  won- 
der is,  not  that  the  opposition  failed  of  its  object,  but  that  the  Council  so  long  held  its  peace. 


64  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

that  they  could  not  understand  the  English  Latin.  The  Council  had 
a  full  share  of  ignorance  and  superstition/  and  was  disgraced  by  in- 
trigues and  occasional  outbursts  of  intolerance  and  passion  such  as  are, 
alas!  not  unusual  in  deliberative  assemblies  even  of  the  Christian 
Church.'^  But  it  embraced  also  much  learning  and  eloquence,  espe- 
cially on  the  part  of  the  French  and  German  Episcopate.  Upon  the 
whole,  it  compares  favorably,  as  to  intellectual  ability,  moral  character, 
and  far-reaching  effect,  with  preceding  Koman  Councils,  and  must  be 

*  Some  amusing  examples  are  reported  by  the  well-informed  Quirinus.  Bishop  Pie,  of 
Poitiers,  supported  the  Papal  Infallibility  in  a  session  of  the  General  Congregation  (May 
13)  by  an  entirely  original  argument  derived  from  the  legend  that  Peter  was  crucified  down- 
ward ;  for  as  his  head  bore  the  whole  weight  of  the  body,  so  the  Pope,  as  the  head,  bears 
the  whole  Church ;  but  he  is  infallible  who  bears,  not  he  who  is  borne!  The  Italians  and  Span- 
iards applauded  enthusiastically.  Unfortunately  for  the  argument,  the  head  of  Peter  did  not 
bear  his  body,  but  the  cross  bore  both  ;  consequently  the  cross  must  be  infallible.  A  Sicilian 
Prelate  said  the  Sicilians  first  doubted  the  infallibility  of  Peter  when  he  visited  the  island, 
and  sent  a  special  deputation  of  inquiry  to  the  Virgin  Mary,  but  were  assured  by  her  that  she 
remembered  well  having  been  present  when  Christ  conferred  this  prerogative  on  Peter ;  and 
this  satisfied  them  completely.  Quirinus  adds  :  '  The  opposition  Jiishops  see  a  proof  of  the 
insolent  contempt  of  the  majority  in  thus  putting  up  such  men  as  Pie  and  this  Sicilian  to  speak 
against  them. '    Letter  XLVI.  ip.  5S4:. 

'  The  following  characteristic  episode  (ignored,  of  course,  in  Manning's  eulogy)  is  well  au- 
thenticated by  the  concurrent  and  yet  independent  reports  of  Lord  Acton  (V.  Brit.  Rev.\ 
Quirinus  {Letter  XXXIL),  Friedrich  {Tagebuch,  pp.  271,  272),  and  the  author  of  Ce  qui  se 
passe  au  Concile  (p.  69);  comp.  Friedberg  (pp.  104-106).  When  Bishop  Strossmayer,  the 
boldest  member  of  the  opposition  and  an  eloquent  Latinist,  in  a  session  of  the  General  Con- 
gregation (March  22),  spoke  favorably  of  the  great  Leibnitz,  and  paid  Protestants  the  poor 
comphment  of  honesty  (quoting  from  St.  Augustine :  ^Errant,  sed  bona  fide  errant''),  he  was 
interrupted  by  the  bell  of  the  President  (De  Angelis)  and  his  rebuke, '  This  is  no  place  for 
praising  Protestants'  {'■hicce  non  est  locus  laudandi  Protestantes' )\  Veiy  true,  for  the  Coun- 
cil-hall was  only  a  hundred  paces  from  the  Palace  of  the  Inquisition.  When,  resuming,  the 
speaker  ventured  to  attack  the  principle  of  deciding  questions  of  foith  by  mere  majorities,  ho 
was  more  loudly  interrupted  from  all  sides  by  confused  exclamations :  '  Shame !  shame  I 
down  with  the  heretic!'  {'' Descendat  ab  ambone!  Descendat !  Hcereticus!  Hcereticus !  Dam- 
namus  eum!  Damnamus !' )  'Several  Bishops  sprang  from  their  seats,  rushed  to  the  tribune, 
and  shook  their  fists  in  the  speaker's  face'  (Quirinus,  p.  387).  When  one  Bishop  (Place,  of 
Marseilles)  interposed,  ^Ego  non  damnoT  the  cry  was  raised  with  increased  fury:  ^  Omnes, 
omnes  ilium  damnamus !  damnamus .''  Strossmayer  was  forced  by  the  uproar  and  the  con- 
tinued ringing  of  the  bell  to  quit  the  tribune,  but  did  so  with  a  triple  'Protestor.'  The  noise 
was  so  great  that  it  could  be  heard  in  the  interior  of  St.  Peter's.  Some  thought  the  Gari- 
baldia,us  had  broken  in ;  others  that  Infallibility  had  been  proclaimed,  and  shouted,  accord- 
ing to  their  opposite  views,  either  'Long  live  the  infallible  Pope!'  or  'Long  live  the  Pope, 
but  not  the  infallible  one'  (comp.  Quirinus,  and  Ce  qui  se  passe,  p.  69).  Quirinus  says  that 
the  scene,  '  for  dramatic  force  and  theological  significance,  exceeded  almost  any  thing  in  the 
past  history  of  Councils'  (p.  386),  and  that  a  Bishop  of  the  United  States  said  afterwards,  'not 
without  a  sense  of  patriotic  pride,  that  he  knew  now  of  one  assembly  still  rougher  than  the 
Congress  of  his  own  country'  (p.  388).  Similar  scenes  of  violence  occurred  in  the  oecumen- 
ical Councils  of  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon,  but  Christian  civilization  ought  to  have  made  some 
progress  since  the  fifth  century. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL  Q^ 

regarded  as  the  greatest  event  in  the  history  of  the  Papacy  since  the 
Council  of  Trent. 

The  chief  importance  of  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  lies  in  its  decree 
on  Papal  supremacy  and  Infallibility.  It  settled  the  internal  dissen- 
sions between  Ultramontanism  and  Gallicanism,  which  struck  at  the 
root  of  the  fundamental  principle  of  authority ;  it  destroyed  the  inde- 
pendence of  the  Episcopate,  and  made  it  a  tool  of  the  Primacy;  it 
crushed  liberal  Catholicism ;  it  completed  the  system  of  Papal  abso- 
lutism ;  it  raised  the  hitherto  disputed  opinion  of  Papal  Infallibility  to 
the  dignity  of  a  binding  article  of  faith,  which  no  Catholic  can  deny 
without  loss  of  salvation.  The  Pope  may  now  say  not  only,  *  I  am  the 
tradition'  {La  tradisione  son^  ^^),but  also, 'I  am  the  Church'  {Ltglise 
c'est  moi)\ 

But  this  very  triumph  of  absolutism  marks  also  a  new  departure.  It 
gave  rise  to  a  secession  lieaded  by  the  ablest  divines  of  the  Poman 
Church.  It  put  the  Papacy  into  direct  antagonism  to  the  liberal  tend- 
encies of  the  age.  It  excited  the  hostility  of  civil  government  in  all 
those  countries  wdiere  Church  and  State  are  united  on  the  basis  of  a 
concordat  with  the  Roman  See.  No  State  w^ith  any  degree  of  self- 
respect  can  treat  w^ith  a  sovereign  who  claims  infallibility,  and  there- 
fore unconditional  submission  in  matters  of  moral  duty  as  well  as  of 
faith.  In  reaching  the  summit  of  its  power,  the  Papacy  has  hastened 
its  downfall. 

For  Protestants  and  Greeks  the  Vatican  Council  is  no  more  oecu- 
menical than  that  of  Trent,  and  has  only  intensified  the  antagonism. 
Its  oecumenicity  was  also  denied  by  such  eminent  Eoman  Catholic 
scholars  as  DoUinger,  von  Schulte,  and  Eeinkens,  before  tlieir  ex- 
communication as  '  Old  Catholics,'  because  it  lacked  the  two  fun- 
damental conditions  of  liberty  of  discussion  and  moral  unanimity 
of  suffrage.^  But  the  subsequent  submission  of  all  the  Bishops  who 
had  voted  against  Papal  Infallibility,  supplies  the  defect  as  far  as  the 

'  See  the  Old  Catholic  protests  of  the  Professors  in  Munich  and  Breslau  in  Friedberg, 
pp.  152-154,  and  the  literature  on  the  reception  of  the  Council,  ib.  53-56  ;  also  the  discussion 
of  Frommann,  pp.  325  sqq.  454  sqq.  DoUinger,  in  his  famous  censure  of  the  new  order  of  the 
Council,  takes  the  ground  that  the  oecumenicity  of  a  Council  depends  upon  an  authority  out- 
side of  itself,  viz.,  the  public  opinion  as  expressed  in  the  subsequent  approval  of  the  whole 
Church ;  and  Pater  Hotzl  laid  down  the  principle  that  no  Council  is  oecumenical  which  is  not 
approved  and  adopted  as  such  by  the  Church.  Admitting  this,  the  condition  is  now  fulfilled 
in  the  case  of  the  Vatican  Council  to  the  whole  extent  of  the  Roman  Episcopate,  -which  coE' 
stitutes  the  ecclesia  docens,  the  laitv  having  nothing  to  do  but  to  submit. 

E 


QQ  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

Roman  Church  is  concerned.  There  was  notliing  left  to  them  but 
either  to  submit  or  to  be  expelled.  They  chose  the  former,  and  thus 
destroyed  the  legal  and  moral  force  of  their  protest,  although  not  the 
power  of  truth  and  the  nature  of  the  facts  on  which  it  was  based. 
Henceforward  Romanism  must  stand  or  fall  with  the  Vatican  Council. 
But  (as  we  have  before  intimated)  Romanism  is  not  to  be  confounded 
with  Catholicism  any  more  than  the  Jewish  hierarchy  which  crucified 
our  Saviour,  is  identical  with  the  people  of  Israel,  from  w^hich  sprang 
the  Apostles  and  early  converts  of  Christianity.  Tlie  destruction  of 
the  infallible  and  irreformable  Papacy  may  be  the  emancipation  of 
Catholicism,  and  lead  it  from  its  prison-house  to  the  light  of  a  new 
Reformation. 

The  Vatican  Decrees.     The  Constitution  on  the  Catholic  Faith. 

Three  schemes  on  matters  of  faith  were  prepared  for  the  Vatican 
Council — one  against  Rationalism,  one  on  the  Church  of  Christ,  and 
one  on  Christian  Matrimony.  The  first  two  were  revised  and  adopted; 
the  third  w^as  indefinitely  postponed.  There  was  also  much  discussion 
on  the  preparation  ox  a  small  popular  Catechism  adapted  to  the  present 
doctrinal  status  of  the  Roman  Church,  and  intended  to  supersede  the 
numerous  popular  Catechisms  now  in  use ;  but  the  draft,  which  assigned 
the  whole  teaching  power  of  the  Church  to  the  Pope,  to  the  exclusion 
of  the  Episcopate,  encountered  such  opposition  (57  J^^on  Placet,  24 
conditional  Placet)  in  the  provisional  vote  of  May  4,  that  it  was  laid 
on  the  table  and  never  called  up  again.^ 

I.  The  Dogmatic  Constitution  on  the  Catholic  Faith  (constitdtio 

dogmatic  A  DE  FIDE  CATHOLICA). 

It  was  unanimously  adopted  in  the  third  public  session,  April  24 
{Dominica  in  albis),  1870. 

The  original  draft  laid  before  the  Council  embraced  eighteen  chap- 
ters— on  Pantheism,  Rationalism,  Scripture  and  tradition,  revelation, 
faith  and  reason,  the  Trinity,  the  two  natures  of  Christ,  the  primitive 
state,  original  sin,  the  Christian  redemption,  the  supernatural  order  of 


*  Cardinal-Archbishop  Matthieu  of  Besan9on, who  voted  Non  Placet,  is  reported  by  Quirinus 
to  have  said  on  this  occasion:  'On  veut  jeter  V^glise  dans  rabme^  nous  y  jeterons plutot  nos 
cadavres. '    Comp.  FrommanD,  1.  c.  p.  1 60. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  ^7» 

grace;  but  was  laid  aside..^  Archbishop  Connolly,  of  Halifax, recom- 
ntended  that  it  should  be  decently  buried.^ 

In  its  present  form,  the  Constitution  on  the  Catholic  faith  is  reduced  to 
four  chapters,  with  a  proemium  and  a  conclusion.  Chap.  I.  treats  of  God 
as  the  Creator ;  Chap.  II.  of  revelation  ;  Chap.  III.  of  faith ;  Chap.  lY. 
of  faith  and  reason.  Then  follow  18  canons,  in  which  the  errors  of 
Pantheism,  Naturalism,  and  Rationalism  are  condemned  in  a  manner 
substantially  the  same,  though  more  clearly  and  fully,  than  had  been 
done  in  the  first  two  sections  of  the  Syllabus. 

Tlie  decree  asserts,  in  the  old  scholastic  terminology,  the  well-known 
principles  of  Supernaturalism  as  held  by  orthodox  Christians  in  all  ages, 
but  it  completely  ignores  the  freedom  and  progress  of  theological  and 
philosophical  science  and  learning  since  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  it 
forbids  (in  Chap.  II.)  all  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  which  does  not 
agree  with  the  Romish  traditions,  the  Latin  Yulgate,  and  the  fictitious 
'  unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers.'  Hence  a  liberal  member  of  the 
Council,  in  the  course  of  discussion,  declared  the  schema  dejide  a  work 
of  supererogation.  '  What  boots  it,'  he  said, '  to  condemn  errors  which 
have  been  long  condemned,  and  tempt  no  Catholic  ?  The  false  beliefs 
of  mankind  are  beyond  the  reach  of  your  decrees.  The  best  defense  of 
Catholicism  is  religious  science.  Encourage  sound  learning,  and  prove 
by  deeds  as  well  as  words  that  it  is  the  mission  of  the  Church  to  pro- 
mote among  the  nations  liberty,  light,  and  true  prosperity.'^  On  the 
other  hand,  the  Univers  calls  the  schema  a  '  masterpiece  of  clearness 
and  force ;'  the  Civiltd  cattolica  sees  in  it  '  a  reflex  of  the  wisdom  of 
God  ;'^  and  Archbishop  Manning  thinks  that  its  importance  *  can  not 
be  overestimated,'  that  it  is  ^  the  broadest  and  boldest'aifirmation  of  the 
supernatural  and  spiritual  order  ever  yet  made  in  the  face  of  the  world, 
which  is  now  more  than  ever  sunk  in  sen^e  and  heavy  with  MateJ•ial-^ 

ism.'^    Whatever  be  the  value  of  the  positive  principles  of  the  scTiema, 

_ — _^^_^ 

'  Friedrich,  Z)oc«m.  XL  pp.  3-23.  v  "  -^^     -i^ 

^  ^Censeo  schema  cum  honore  esse  sepeliendum^  (Quirinus,  p.  122).  ">  Itnttscher  also  «{^k¥  • 

against  the  schema,  which  made  mucli  impression,  because  he  had  brought  its  ^Ifef  tiuthor, 

the  Jesuit  Schrader,  to  the  University  of  Vienna.  ^     '  -- 

^  Quoted  in  L^tin  by  Lord  Acton  in  the  North  British  R^iStl>,'bct.1S70,  p.  112,  and  in 

Friedberg,  p.  102.    Acton  attributes  this  speech,  not  to  Strbssmayer  (as  Friedberg  says,  1.  c ; 

comp.  pp.  28  and  102)^  but  to  a  '  Swiss  prelate,'  whom  he  does  not  name. 

*  'C/n  riverbero  della  sapienza  di  Dio^'  VII.  10,  p.  523,  quoted  by  Frommann,  1.  c.  p.  383. 

*  Petri  Privilegium^  III,  pp.  49,  50. 


V' 
.  1* 


C8  HISTOilY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

its  Popish  head  and  tail  reduce  it  to  a  hrutum  fulmen  outside  of  the 
Eomish  Church,  and  even  the  most  orthodox  Protestants  must  apply 
to  it  the  warning,  2V?;i^c>  Danaos  et  dona  ferentes. 

The  preamble,  even  in  its  present  modified  form,  derives  modern 
Rationalism  and  infidelity,  as  a  legitimate  fruit,  from  the  heresies  con- 
demned by  the  Council  of  Trent — that  is,  from  the  Protestant  Eefor- 
mation ;  in  the  face  of  the  fact,  patent  to  every  scholar,  that  Protestant 
theology  has  been  in  the  thickest  of  the  fight  with  unbelief,  and,  not- 
withstanding all  its  excesses,  has  produced  a  far  richer  exegetical  and 
apologetic  literature  than  Romanism  during  the  last  three  hundred 
years.^  The  boldest  testimony  heard  in  the  Council  was  dii-ected 
against  this  preamble  by  Bishop  Strossmayer,  from  the  Turkish  frontier 
(March  22, 1870).  He  characterized  the  charge  against  Protestantism 
as*  neither  just  nor  charitable.  Protestants,  he  said,  abhorred  the  errors 
condemned  in  the  schema  as  much  as  Catholics.  The  germ  of  Ration- 
alism existed  in  the  Catholic  Church  before  the  Reformation,  especially 
in  the  humanism  which  was  nourished  in  the  very  sanctuary  by  the 
highest  dignitaries,^  and  bore  its  worst  fruits  in  the  midst  of  a  Catholic 
nation  at  the  time  of  Yoltaire  and  the  Encjyclopedists.  Catholics  had 
produced  no  better  refutation  of  the  errors  enumerated  in  the  schema 
than  such  men  as  Leibnitz  and  Guizot.  There  were  multitudes  of 
Protestants  in  Germany,  England,  and  North  America  who  loved  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  had  inherited  from  the  shipwreck  of  faith  posi- 
tive truths  and  monuments  of  divine  grace.^  Although  this  speech 
was  greeted  with  execrations  (see  page  145),  it  had  at  least  the  effect 
that  the  objectionable  preamble  was  somewhat  modified.* 

*  The  objectionable  passage,  as  finally  adopted,  reads  thus :  '  No  one  is  ignorant  that  the 
lieresies  proscribed  by  the  Fathers  of  Trent,  by  which  the  divine  magisterium  of  the  Church 
was  rejected,  and  all  matters  regarding  religion  were  surrendered  to  the  judgment  of  each 
individual,  gradually  became  dissolved  into  many  sects,  which  disagreed  and  contended  with 
one  another,  until  at  length  not  a  few  lost  all  faith  in  Christ.  Even  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
which  had  previously  been  declared  the  sole  source  and  judge  of  Christian  doctrine,  began  to 
be  held  no  longer  as  divine,  but  to  be  ranked  among  the  fictions  of  mythology.  Then  there 
arose,  and  too  widely  overspread  the  world,  that  doctrine  of  Rationalism  which  opposes  itself 
in  every  way  to  the  Christian  religion  as  a  supernatural  institution.'  See  the  different  re- 
visions of  the  schema  dejide  in  Friedrich's  Monum.  Ft.  11.  pp.  3,  G5,  73. 

'  Allusion  to  Pope  Leo  X. 

^  See  the  principal  part  of  Strossmayer's  speech  in  Latin  in  Lord  Acton's  article  in  the 
North  British  Review,  Oct.  1870,  pp.  11 5, 1 IG,  and  in  Friedberg,  pp.  104-100. 

*  The  words  in  the  first  revision  (Friedr.  Docuin.  II.  p.  G.')),  s)/stematum  monstra,  mythismi, 
rationalismi,  indifferentismi  nomine  designata,  etc.,  together  with  some  other  offensive  ex- 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  6^ 

The  supplement  of  the  decree  binds  all  Catholics  to  observe  also 
those  constitutions  and  decrees  by  which  such  erroneous  opinions  as 
are  not  here  specifically  enumerated  have  been  proscribed  and  con- 
demned by  the  Holy  See.  This  can  be  so  construed  as  to  include 
all  the  eiglity  errors  of  the  Syllabus.  The  minority  who  in  the  Gen- 
eral Congregation  had  voted  Non  Placet  or  only  a  conditional  Placet, 
were  quieted  by  the  ofiicial  assurance  that  the  addition  involved  no 
new  dogma,  and  had  a  disciplinary  rather  than  a  didactic  character. 
*  Some  gave  their  votes  with  a  heavy  heart,  conscious  of  the  snare.' 
Strossmayer  stayed  away.  Thus  a  unanimous  vote  of  667  or  668  fa- 
thers was  secured  in  the  public  session,  and  the  Infallibility  decree  was 
virtually  anticipated.  The  Pope,  after  proclaiming  tlie  dogma,  gave 
the  Bishops  his  benediction  of  peace,  and  gently  intimated  what  he 
next  expected  from  them.^ 

TuE  Vatican  Deceees,  continued.     The  Infallibility  Decree. 
II.  The  Fikst  Dogmatic  Constitution  on  the  Church  of  Christ  (con- 

STITUTIO  DOGMATICA  PRIMA  DE  ECCLESIA  ChEISTi). 

It  was  passed,  with  two  dissenting  votes,  in  the  fourth  public  session, 
July  18, 1870.  It  treats,  in  four  chapters — (1)  on  the  institution  of  the 
Apostolic  Primacy  in  the  blessed  Peter;  (2)  on  the  perpetuity  of  St. 
Peter's  Primacy  in  the  Koman  Pontiff;  (3)  on  the  power  and  nature 

pressions,  were  omitted ;  but,  after  all,  the  substance  remained.  Lord  Acton  relates  that  the 
German  Jesuit  Kleutgen  hastily  drew  up  the  more  moderate  form.  Comp.  Quirinus,  Letter 
XXXIII.  p.  394  sq.  Political  influence  was  also  brought  to  bear  indirectly  upon  the  Coun- 
cil, as  appeared  afterwards  from  Italian  papers.  Bismarck  directed  the  German  Embas- 
sador at  Rome,  Count  Arnim,  to  inform  Cardinal  Antonelli  that,  unless  the  charge  against 
Protestantism  was  withdrawn,  he  would  not  allow  the  Prussian  Bishops  on  their  return  to 
resume  their  functions  in  a  country  whose  faith  they  had  insulted.  Friedrich,  Tagehuch,  pp. 
27.5,  292  ;  Frommann,  Geschichte  des  Vat.  Concils^  p.  145  ;  Hase,  Polem.  p.  34.  The  latter 
overestimates  the  influence  of  Prussia  on  the  Papal  court  when  he  says:  'If  France  com- 
plains of  the  Council,  Antonelli  makes  three  bows,  and  all  remains  as  before ;  but  if  Prussia 
comes  with  her  mustache  and  cavalry  boots,  Rome  understands  that  the  word  is  quickly  fol- 
lowed by  the  deed,  and  wisely  yields.  Strossmayer  and  von  Arnim  were  in  doubt  which  one 
of  them  had  been  most  instrumental  in  saving  the  Council  from  an  impropriety.' 

^  '^Videtis,^  he  said,  ^Fratres  carissimi,  quam  honum  sit  et  jticundum  ambulare  in  domo  Dei 
cum  consensu,  ambulare  cum  pace.  Sic  ambuletis  semper.  Et  quoniam  hac  die  Dominus  Nostcr 
Jesus  Chrisius  dedit  pacem  Apostolis  suis,  et  ego,  Vicarizis  ejus  indignus,  nomine  suo  do  vobis 
pacem.  Pax  ista,  prout  scitis,  expellit  timorem.  Pax  i.tta,  prout  scitis,  claudit  aures  sermo- 
nibus  imperitis.  Ah  I  ista  pax  vos  comitetur  omnibus  diebus  vitoe  vestra;  sit  ista  pax  vis  in 
morte,  sit  ista  pax  vobis  gaudium  sempiternum  in  coelis.^ 


'JTSriVERSITT  ' 

.  ^•*<-£iId£22«'*^HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

of  the  Primacy  of  the  Roman  Pontiff ;  (4)  on  the  Infallibility  of  the 
Roman  Pontiff. 

Tlie  new  features  are  contained  in  the  last  two  chapters,  which  teach 
Papal  Absolutism  and  Papal  Infallibility.  The  third  chapter  vindi- 
cates to  the  Roman  Pontiff  a  superiority  of  ordinary  episcopal  (not 
simply  an  extraordinary  primatial)  power  over  all  other  Churches,  and 
an  immediate  jurisdiction,  to  which  all  Catholics,  both  pastors  and  peo- 
ple, are  bound  to  submit  in  matters  not  only  of  faith  and  morals,  but 
even  of  discipline  and  government.*  He  is,  therefore,  the  Bishop  of 
Bishops,  over  every  single  Bishop,  and  over  all  Bishops  put  together ; 
he  is  in  the  fullest  sense  the  Yicar  of  Christ,  and  all  Bishops  are  sim- 
ply Yicars  of  the  Pope.  The  fourth  chapter  teaches  and  defines,  as  a 
divinely  revealed  dogma,  that  the  Roman  Pontiff,  when  speaking  from 
his  cliair  {ex  cathedra),  i.  e.,  in  his  official  capacity,  to  the  Christian 
world  on  subjects  relati-ng  to  faitli  or  morals,  is  infallible,  and  that  sucli 
definitions  are  irreformable  (i.  e.,  final  and  irreversible)  in  and  of  them- 
selves, and  not  in  consequence  of  the  consent  of  the  Church.^ 

*  After  quoting,  in  a  mutilated  form,  the  definition  of  the  Council  of  Florence,  whose 
genuineness  is  disputed  (compare  p.  97,  note  1),  the  third  chapter  goes  on:  ''Docemus  et 
declaramus,  Ecclesiam  Romanam,  disponente  Domino,  super  omnes  alias  ordinarice  potestatis 
obtinere  principatum,  et  hanc  Romani  Pontijicis  jurisdictionis  potestatem,  qua;  vere  episco- 
palis  est,  immediatam  esse,  erga  quam  cujuscunque  ritus  et  dignitatis  pastores  atque  Jideles, 
tain  seorsum  singuU  quam  simul  omnes,  officio  hierarchiccB  suhordinationis  verceque  obedieniice 
obstringuntur,  non  solum  in  rebus,  qua;  adjidem  et  mores,  sed  etiam  in  iis,  quce  ad  disciplinam 
et  regimen  EcclesicE  per  totum  orbem  diffusce  pertinent ;  ita  ut,c.ustodita  cum  Romano  Pontijice 
tarn  communionis  quam  ejusdem  Jidei  professionis  unitate,  Ecclesioe  Christi  sit  unus  grex.  sub 
uno  summo  past  ore.  Hcec  est  catholicce  veritatis  doctrina,  a  qua  deviare  salvajide  atque  salute 
nemo  potest.  .  .  .  Si  quis  itaque  dixerit,  Romanum  Pontijicem  habere  tantummodo  officium 
inspectionis  vel  directionis,  non  autem  plenum  et  supremam  potestatem  jurisdictionis  in  uni- 
versam  Ecclesiam,  non  solum  in  rebus,  quce  adjidem  et  mores,  sed  etiam  in  its,  quce  ad  discipli- 
nam et  regimem  Ecclesioe  per  totum  orbem  diffusce  pertinent ;  aut  eum  habere  tantum  potiores 
partes,  non  vero  totam  plenitudinem  hujus  supremce  potestatis;  aut  hanc  ejus  potestatem  non 
esse  ordinariam  et  immediatam  sive  in  omnes  ac  singulas  ecclesias,  sive  in  omnes  et  singidos 
pastores  et  Jideles;  anathema  sit/ 

^  ^Itaque  Nos  traditioni  a  Jidei  Christiance  exordia  perceptoi  Jideliter  inhcerendo,  ad  Dei 
Salvatoris  nostri  gloriam,  religionis  Catholicce  exaltationem  et  Christianorum  populorum  salu- 
tem,  sacro  approbante  Concilio,  docemus  et  divinitus  revelatum  dogma  esse  declaramus ;  Ro- 
manum POXTIFICEM,  CUM  EX  CaTHEDRA  LOQUITUR,  ID  EST,  CUM  OMNIUM  ChRISTIANORUM 

Pastoris  et  Doctoris  munere  fungens  pro  suprema  sua  Apostolica  AUCTORITATE 
roctrinam  de  fide  vel  moribus  ab  universa  ecclesia  tenendam  definit,  per  assis- 

TENTIAM   DIVINAM,  IPSI    IN    BEATO  PeTRO    PROMISSAM,  EA   INFALLIBILITATE    POLLERE,  QUA 

DiviNus  Redemptor  Ecclesiam  suam  in  definienda  doctrina  de  fide  vel  MORIBUS 

INSTRUCTAM  ESSE  VOLUIT  ;    IDEOQUE  EJUSMODI  RoMANI  PONTIFICIS  DEFINITIONES  EX  SESE, 
NON  AUTEM  EX  CONSENSU  EcCLESIiE,  IRREFORMABILES  ESSE. 

^Si  quis  autem  huic  Nostrce  definitioni  contradicere,  quod  Deus  avertat,  proesumpserit ; 
anathema  sit.' 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  71 

To  appreciate  the  value  and  bearing  of  this  decree,  we  must  give  a 
brief  history  of  it. 

The  Infallibility  question  was  suspended  over  the  Council  from  the 
very  beginning  as  the  question  of  questions,  for  good  or  for  evil.  The 
original  plan  of  the  Infallibilists,  to  decide  it  by  acclamation,  had  to  be 
abandoned  in  view  of  a  formidable  opposition,  which  was  developed  in- 
side and  outside  of  the  Council.  The  majority  of  the  Bishops  circulated, 
early  in  January,  a  monster  petition,  signed  by  410  names,  in  favor  of 
Infallibility.^  The  Italians  and  the  Spaniards  circulated  similar  peti- 
tions separately.  Archbishop  Spalding,  of  Baltimore,  formerly  an  anti- 
Infallibilist,  prepared  an  address  offering  some  compromise  to  the 
effect  that  an  appeal  from  the  Pope  to  an  oecumenical  Council  should 
be  reproved.^  But  five  counter-petitions,  signed  by  very  weighty 
names,  in  all  137,  representing  various  degrees  of  opposition,  but 
agreed  as  to  the  inojpjportunity  of  the  definition,  were  sent  in  during 
the  same  month  (Jan.  12  to  18)  by  German  and  Austrian,  Hungarian, 
French,  American,  Oriental,  and  Italian  Bishops.^ 

The  Pope  received  none  of  these  addresses,  but  referred  them  to  the 
Deputation  on  Faith.  While  in  this  he  showed  his  impartiality,  he 
did  not  conceal,  in  a  private  way,  his  real  opinion,  and  gave  it  the 
weight  of  his  personal  character  and  influence.  '  Faith  in  his  personal 
infallibility,'  says  a  well-informed  Catholic, '  and  belief  in  a  constant 
and  special  communication  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  form  the  basis  of 
the  character  of  Pius  IX.''*  In  the  Council  itself.  Archbishop  Manning, 
the  Anglican  convert,  was  the  most  zealous,  devout,  and  enthusiastic 
Infallibilist ;  he  urged  the  definition  as  the  surest  means  of  gaining 
hesitating  Anglo-Catholics  and  Kitualists  longing  for  absolute  authority ; 
while  his  former  teacher  and  friend,  Dr.  Pusey,  feared  that  the  new 

*  Friedberg,  pp.  465-470.     Comp.  Frommann,  p.  59  sq. 
2  Friedberg,  pp.  470  sqq. ;  Frommann,  pp.  Gl-63. 

^  Friedberg,  pp.  472-478.  The  American  petition  against  Infallibility  was  signed  by  Pur- 
cell,  of  Cincinnati ;  Kenrick,  of  St.  Louis  ;  McCloskey,  of  New  Yoik  ;  Connolly,  of  Halifax ; 
Bayley,  of  Newark  (now  Archbishop  of  Baltimore),  and  several  others. 

*  Ce  qui  se  passe  au  Concile,  p.  130.  The  writer  adds  that  some  of  the  predecessors  of  Pius 
have  held  his  doctrines,  but  none  has  been  so  ardently  convinced,  none  has  professed  them 
'  avec  ce  wysticisme  enthousiaste,  ce  d^dain  pour  les  remontrances  des  savants  et  des  sar/es, 
cette  conjiance  impassible.  Quel  que  soit  lejugement  de  Vhistoire,  personne  ne  pourra  nier  que 
cettefoi  profonde  ne  lui  ait  cr^e  dans  le  dix-neuvieme  siecle  une  personnalit€  d'une  puissance  et 
d'une  majeste  incomparables,  dont  V eclat  grandit  encore  zin  pontijicat  d^ja  si  remarquable  par 
une  dur^e,  des  vertus  et  des  malheurs  vraiment  cxceptionneis.' 


72  HISTORY  OF  THE  VxVTICAN  COUNCIL. 

dogma  would  make  the  breach  between  Oxford  and  Rome  wider  than 
ever.  Manning  is  'more  Catholic  than  Catholics'  to  the  manor  born, 
as  the  English  settlers  in  Ireland  were  more  Irish  than  Irishmen,^  and 
is  altogether  worthy  to  be  the  successor  of  Pius  IX.  in  the  chair  of 
St.  Peter.  Both  these  eminent  and  remarkable  persons  show  how  a 
sincere  faith  in  a  dogma,  which  borders  on  blasphemy,  may,  by  a  strange 
delusion  or  hallucination,  be  combined  witl^rare  purity  and  amiability 
of  character. 

Besides  the  all-powerful  aid  of  the  Pope,  whom  no  Bishop  can  dis- 
obey without  fatal  consequences,  the  Infallibilists  had  the  great  advan- 
tage of  perfect  unity  of  sentiment  and  aim ;  while  the  anti-Infallibilists 
were  divided  among  themselves,  many  of  them  being  simply  inoppor- 
tunists.  They  professed  to  agree  with  the  majority  in  principle  or 
practice,  and  to  differ  from  them  only  on  the  subordinate  question  of 
definability  and  opportunity .^  This  qualified  opposition  had  no  weight 
whatever  with  the  Pope,  ^\\\o  was  as  fully  convinced  of  the  opportu- 
nity and  necessity  of  the  definition  as  he  was  of  the  dogma  itself.^ 
And  even  the  most  advanced  anti-Infallibilists,  as  Ken  rick,  Hefele,  and 
Strossmayer,  w^ere  too  much  hampered  by  Romish  traditionalism  to  plant 
their  foot  firmly  on  the  Scriptures,  which  after  all  must  decide  all  ques- 
tions of  faith. 

In  the  mean  time  a  literary  war  on  Infallibility  was  carried  on  in 
the  Catholic  Church  in  Germany,  France,  and  England,  and  added 
to  the  commotion  in  Rome.  A  large  number  of  pamphlets,  written 
or  inspired  by  prominent  members  of  the  Council,  appeared  for  and 
against  Infallibility.  Distinguished  outsiders,  as  Dollinger,  Gratry,  H}*- 
acinthe,  Montalembert,  and  Xewman,  mixed  in  the  fight,  and  strength- 

^  So  Archbishop  Kenrick,  of  St.  Louis,  characterized  him  in  his  Concio  hahenda  at  non 
habita.  Quirinus  (Appendix  I.  p.  832)  quotes  from  a  sermon  of  Manning,  preached  at  Ken- 
siogton,  1869,  in  the  Pope'^  name,  the  following  passage  :  '  I  claim  to  be  the  Supreme  Judge 
and  director  of  the  consciences  of  men — of  the  peasant  that  tills  the  field,  and  the  prince  that 
sits  on  the  throne ;  of  the  household  that  lives  in  the  shade  of  privacy,  and  the  Legislature 
that  viakes  laics  for  kingdoms.     I  am  the  sole  last  Supreme  Judge  of  what  is  right  and  wrong.' 

^  Only  the  address  of  the  German  Bishops  took  openly  the  ground  that  it  would  be  difficult 
from  internal  reasons  (viz.,  the  contradiction  of  history  and  tradition)  to  proclaim  Infallibility 
as  a  dogma  of  revelation.     See  Friedrich,  Tagehuch,  p.  1 20 ;  and  Frommann,  Gesrhichte,  p.  G2. 

'  On  being  asked  whether  he  considered  the  definition  of  the  dogma  opportune,  Pius  IX. 
resolutely  answered,  'No!  but  necessary.^  He  complained  of  the  opposing  Bishops,  that, 
living  among  Protestants,  they  were  infected  by  their  freedom  of  thought,  and  had  lost  the 
true  traditional  feeling.     Hase,  p.  180. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  73 

eiied  the  minority.^  The  utterance  of  Dr.  John  Henry  Newman,  tlie 
intellectual  leader  of  the  Anglo-Catholic  apostasy,  and  by  far  the  ablest 
scholar  and  dialectician  among  English  Eomanists,  reveals  a  most  curi- 
ous state  of  mind,  oscillating  between  absolute  infallibilism  and  hope- 
less skepticism,  and  taking  refuge  at  last  in  prayer — not  to  Christ,  nor 
to  the  Holy  Ghost,  nor  to  the  Apostles,  but — to  St.  Ambrose,  St.  Jerome, 
and  St.  Augustine,  that  they  might  enlighten  the  Council  at  this  critical 
juncture,  and  decide  the  matter  by  their  intercession.^ 

'  See  the  literature  in  the  next  section,  and  in  Fiiedberg,  pp.  33-44.     Comp.  Frommann, 
pp.  G6  sqq. 

=  In  striking  contrast  with  his  admiring  pupil,  Manning,  Dr.  Newman  thus  unburdened  his 
troubled  heart  to  Bishop  Ullathorne,  of  Birmingham  (see  his  letter  published  '  by  permission' 
in  the  Standard  of  April  7,  1870) :  '  Rome  ought  to  be  a  name  to  lighten  the  heart  at  all 
times,  and  a  Council's  proper  office  is,Avhen  some  great  heresy  or  other  evil  impends,  to  in- 
spire hope  and  confidence  in  the  faithful ;  but  now  we  have  the  greatest  meeting  which  ever 
lias  been,  and  that  at  Rome,  infusing  into  us  by  the  accredited  organs  of  Rome  and  of  its 
partisans,  such  as  the  Civilta  (t\vQ  Armonia^,  the  Univers,  and  the  Tablet,  little  else  than  fear 
and  dismay.  When  we  are  all  at  rest,  and  have  no  doubts,  and — at  least  practically,  not  to 
say  doctrinally — hold  the  Holy  Father  to  be  infallible,  suddenly  there  is  thunder  in  the  clear- 
est sky,  and  we  are  told  to  prepare  for  something,  we  know  not  what,  to  try  our  faith,  we 
know  not  how.  No  impending  danger  is  to  be  averted,  but  a  great  difficulty  is  to  be  created. 
Is  this  the  proper  work  for  an  oecumenical  Council?  As  to  myself  personally,  please  God, 
I  do  not  expect  any  trial  at  all ;  but  I  can  not  help  suffering  with  the  many  souls  who  are 
suffering,  and  I  look  with  anxiety  at  the  prospect  of  having  to  defend  decisions  which  may 
not  be  difficult  to  my  own  private  judgment,  but  may  be  most  difficult  to  maintain  logically 
in  the  face  of  historical  facts.  What  have  we  done  to  be  treated  as  the  faithful  never  were 
treated  before?  When  has  a  definition  dejide  been  a  luxury  of  devotion,  and  not  a  stern, . 
painful  necessity?  Why  should  an  aggressive,  insolent  faction  be  allowed  to  "make  the 
heart  of  the  just  sad,  whom  the  Lord  hath  not  made  sorrowful  ?"  Why  can  not  we  be  let 
alone  when  we  have  pursued  peace  and  thought  no  evil  ?  I  assure  you,  my  lord,  some  of  the 
truest  minds  are  driven  one  way  and  another,  and  do  not  know  where  to  rest  their  feet — one 
day  determining  "to  give  up  all  theology  as  a  bad  job,"  and  recklessly  to  believe  henceforth 
almost  that  the  Pope  is  impeccable,  at  another  tempted  to  "believe  all  the  worst  which  a 
book  like  Janws  says;"  others  doubting  about  "the  capacity  possessed  by  Bishops  drawn 
from  all  corners  of  the  earth  to  judge  what  is  fitting  for  European  society,"  and  then,  again, 
angry  with  the  Holy  See  for  listening  to  "  the  flattery  of  a  clique  of  Jesuits.  Kedcmptorists, 
and  converts,"  Then,  again,  think  of  the  store  of  Pontifical  scandals  in  the  history  of  ei.  hteen 
centuries,  which  have  partly  been  poured  forth,  and  partly  are  still  to  come.  W^hat  Murphy 
[a  Protestant  traveling  preacher]  inflicted  upon  us  in  one  way,  Mr.  Veuillot  is  indirectly  bring- 
ing on  us  in  another.  And  then,  again,  the  blight  which  is  falling  upon  the  multitude  of  Angli- 
can Ritualists,  etc.,  who  themselves,  perhaps— at  least  their  leaders — may  never  become  Cath- 
olics, but  who  are  leavening  the  various  English  denominations  and  parties  (far  beyond  their 
own  range)  with  principles  and  sentiments  tending  towards  their  ultimate  absorption  into  the 
Catholic  Church.  With  these  thoughts  ever  before  me,  I  am  continually  asking  myself  wheth- 
er I  ought  not  to  make  my  feelings  public ;  but  all  I  do  is  to  pray  those  early  doctors  of  the 
Church,  whose  intercession  would  decide  the  matter  (Augustine,  Ambrose,  and  Jerome,  Atha- 
nasius,  Chrysostom,  and  Basil),  to  avert  this  great  calamity.  If  it  is  God's  will  that  the  Pope's 
infallibility  be  defined,  then  is  it  God's  will  to  throw  back  "the  times  and  moments"  of  that 


74  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

After  preliminary  skirmishes,  the  formal  discussion  began  in  earnest 
in  the  50th  session  of  the  General  Congregation,  May  13, 1870,  and 
lasted  to  the  86th  General  Congregation,  July  16.  About  eighty  Latin 
speeches^  were  delivered  in  the  general  discussion  on  the  schema  de 
Romano  Poiitifice,  nearly  one  half  of  them  on  the  part  of  the  oppo- 
sition, which  embraced  less  than  one  fifth  of  the  Council.  When  the 
arguments  and  the  patience  of  the  assembly  were  pretty  well  exhaust- 
ed, the  President,  at  the  petition  of  a  hundred  and  fifty  Bishops,  closed 
the  general  discussion  on  the  third  day  of  June.  About  forty  more 
Bishops,  who  had  entered  their  names,  were  thus  prevented  from  speak- 
ing; but  one  of  them,  Archbishop  Kenrick,  of  St.  Louis,  published  his 
strong  argument  against  Lifallibility  in  Naples."  Then  five  special 
discussions  commenced  on  the  proemium  and  the  four  chapters.  '  For 
the  fifth  or  last  discussion  a  hundred  and  twenty  Bishops  inscribed 
their  names  to  speak ;  fifty  of  them  were-  heard,  until  on  both  sides  tlie 
burden  became  too  heavy  to  bear ;  and,  by  mutual  consent,  a  useless 
and  endless  discussion,  from  mere  exhaustion,  ceased.'^ 

When  the  vote  was  taken  on  the  whole  four  chapters  of  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  Church,  July  13, 1870,  in  the  85th  secret  session  of  the 
General  Congregation  (601  members  being  present),  451  voted  Placet^ 
SS  Non  Placet^  62  Placet  juxia  modum^  over  80  (perhaps  91),  though 
present  in  Rome  or  in  the  neighborhood,  abstained  for  various  reasons 
from  voting.*     Among  the  negative  votes  w^ere  the  Prelates  most  dis- 

triumph  which  he  has  destined  for  his  kingdom,  and  I  shall  feel  I  have  but  to  bow  my  head 
to  his  adorable,  inscrutable  Providence.  You  have  not  touched  upon  the  subject  yourself,  but 
I  think  you  will  allow  me  to  express  to  you  feelings  which,  for  the  most  part,  I  keep  to  my- 
self. .  .  .'  See  an  excellent  German  translation  of  this  letter  in  Quirinus  (p.  274,  Germ,  ed.) 
and  in  Friedberg  (p.  131).  The  English  translator  of  Quirinus  has  substituted  the  English 
original  as  given  here. 

'  According  to  Manning,  but  only  G5  according  to  Friedberg,  p.  47. 

^  Hence  the  title  '■Concio  Jiabenda  at  non  hahita' — prepared  for  speaJd'ng,  but  not  spoJcen. 
See  the  prefatory  note,  dated  Rome,  June  8, 1870. 

'  Manning,  Petri  Privil.  III.  pp.  31,  32.  He  gives  this  representation  to  vindicate  the 
liberty  of  the  Council ;  but  the  minority  complained  of  an  arbitrary  close  of  the  discussion. 
They  held  an  indignation  meeting  in  the  residence  of  Cardinal  Rauscher,  and  protested  '■con- 
tra violationem  nostri  juris,^  but  without  effect.  See  the  protest,  with  eighty-one  signatures, 
in  Friedrich,  Doc.  II.  p.  379  ;  comp.  Frommann,  Geschickte,  p.  174. 

*  See  the  list  in  Friedberg,  pp.  146-149  ;  also  in  Friedrich,  Docum.  II.  pp.  426  sqq. ;  and 
Quirinus,  Letter  LXVI.  pp.  778  sqq.  Quirinus  errs  in  counting  the  91.  (according  to  others, 
85  or  only  70)  absentees  among  the  GOl.  There  were  in  all  from  680  to  692  members  present 
in  Rome  at  the  time.  See  Fessler,  p.  89  (who  states  the  number  of  absentees  to  be  '  over  80'), 
and  Frommann,  p.  201.     The  protest  of  the  minority  to  the  Pope,  July  17,  states  the  number 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  75 

tinguished  for  learning  and  position,  as  Sciiwarzenberg,  Cardinal 
Prince-Arclibishop  of  Prague ;  Rauscher,  Cardinal  Prince- Archbishop 
of  Vienna ;  Darboy,  Archbishop  of  Paris ;  Matphieu,  Cardinal-Arch- 
bishop of  Besangon;  Ginoulhiac,  Archbishop  of  Lyons;  Dcpanloup, 
Bishop  of  Orleans ;  Maret,  Bishop  of  Sura  (i.  p.) ;  Simor,  Archbisliop 
of  Gran  and  Primate  of  Hungary;  IIaynald,  Archbishop  of  Kalocsa; 
FoRSTER,  Prince-Archbishop  of  Breslau ;  Scherr,  Archbishop  of  Mu- 
nich ;  Ketteler,  Bishop  of  Mayence ;  Hefele,  Bishop  of  Rottenburg ; 
Strossmayer,  Bishop  of  Bosnia  and  Sirmium ;  MacHale,  Archbishop 
of  Tuam ;  Connolly,  Archbishop  of  Halifax ;  Kenrick,  Archbishop  of 
St.  Louis. 

On  the  evening  of  the  13th  of  July  the  minority  sent  a  deputation, 
consisting  of  Simor,  Ginoulhiac,  Scherr,  Darboy,  Ketteler,  and  Rivet, 
to  the  Pope.  After  waiting  an  hour,  they  were  admitted  at  9  o'clock 
in  the  evening.  They  asked  simply  for  a  withdrawal  of  the  addition 
to  the  third  chapter,  which  assigns  to  the  Pope  the  exclusive  posses- 
sion of  all  ecclesiastical  powers,  and  for  the  insertion,  in  the  fourth 
chapter,  of  a  clause  limiting  his  infallibility  to  those  decisions  which 
he  pronounces  'innixus  testimonio  ecclesiarwn,^  Pius  returned  the 
almost  incredible  answer :  '  I  shall  do  what  I  can,  my  dear  sons,  but  I 
have  not  yet  read  the  scheme ;  I  do  not  know  what  it  contains.'^  He 
requested  Darboy,  the  spokesman  of  the  deputation,  to  hand  him  the 
petition  in  writing.  Darboy  promised  to  do  so ;  and  added,  not  without 
irony,  that  he  would  send  with  it  the  schema  which  the  Deputation  on 
Faith  and  the  Legates  had  with  such  culpable  levity  omitted  to  lay  be- 
fore his  Holiness,  exposing  him  to  the  risk  of  proclaiming  in  a  few  days 
a  decree  he  was  ignorant  of.  Pius  surprised  the  deputation  by  the 
astounding  assurance  that  the  whole  Church  had  always  taught  the 
unconditional  Infallibility  of  the  Pope.  Then  Bishop  Ketteler  of 
Mayence  implored  the  holy  Father  on  his  knees  to  make  some  conces- 


of  voters  in  the  same  way,  except  that  70,  instead  of  91  or  85,  is  given  as  the  number  of  absen- 
tees :  ^Notum  est  Sanctitati  Vestrce,  88  Patres  fuisse,  qui,  conscientia  urgente  et  amore  s.  Ec- 
clesice  permoti,  suffragium  suum  per  verba  NON  placet  emiserunt ;  02  alios,  qui  suffragati  sunt 
per  verba  placet  juxta  modum,  denique  70  circiter  qui  a  congregatione  abfuerunt  atque  a 
suffragio  emittendo  abstinuerunt.  Hie  accedunt  et  alii,  qui,  injirmitatibus  aut  gravioribus 
rationibus  ducti,  ad  suas  diceceses  reversi  sunt.* 

*  He  spoke  in  French :   '•Je  feral  vion  possible,  mes  chersfils,  mais  je  n'ai  pas  encore  lu  le 
schema;  je  ne  sais pas  ce  quil contient.'    Quirinus,  Letter  LXIX.  p.  800. 


76  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

sion  for  tlie  peace  and  unity  of  the  Church.^  .  This  prostration  of  the 
proudest  of  the  German  prelates  made  some  impression.  Pius. dis- 
missed the  deputation  in  a  hopeful  temper.  But  immediately  after- 
wards Manning  and  Senestrey  (Bishop  of  Regensburg)  strengthened  his 
faith,  and  frightened  him  by  the  warning  that,  if  he  made  any  conces- 
sion, he  would  be  disgraced  in  history  as  a  second  Honorins. 

In  the  secret  session  on  the  16th  of  July,  on  motion  of  some  Spanish 
Bishops,  an  addition  was  inserted  '  non  autem  ex  consensu  ecclesice^ 
which  makes  the  decree  still  more  obnoxious.^  On  the  same  day  Car- 
dinal Rauscher,  in  a  private  audience,  made  another  attempt  to  induce 
the  Pope  to  yield,  but  w^as  told, '  It  is  too  late.' 

On  the  17th  of  July  fifty-six  Bishops  sent  a  written  protest  to  the 
Pope,  declaring  that  nothing  had  occurred  to  change  their  conviction 
as  expressed  in  their  negative  vote ;  on  the  contrary,  tliey  were  con- 
firmed in  it ;  yet  filial  piety  and  reverence  for  the  holy  Father  would 
not  permit  them  to  vote  N'on  Placet,  openly  and  in  his  face,  in  a  matter 
which  so  intimately  concerned  his  person,  and  that  therefore  they  had 

'  Quirinus,  Letter  LXIX.  p.  801,  gave,  a  few  days  afterwards,  from  direct  information,  the 
following  fresh  and  graphic  description  of  this  interesting  scene :  '  Bishop  Ketteler  then  came 
forward,  flung  himself  on  his  knees  before  the  Pope,  and  entreated  for  several  minutes  that 
the  Father  of  the  Catholic  world  would  make  some  concession  to  restore  peace  and  her  lost 
unity  to  the  Church  and  the  Episcopate.  It  was  a  peculiar  spectacle  to  witness  these  two 
men,  of  kindred  and  yet  widely  diverse  nature,  in  such  an  attitude — the  one  prostrate  on  the 
ground  before  the  other.  Pius  is  "  totus  teres  atque  rotundus,"  firm  and  immovable,  smooth 
and  hard  as  marble,  infinitely  self-satisfied  intellectually,  mindless  and  ignorant ;  without  any 
understanding  of  the  mental  condifions  and  needs  of  mankind,  without  any  notion  of  the 
character  of  foreign  nations,  but  as  credulous  as  a  nun,  and,  above  all,  penetrated  through 
and  through  with  reverence  for  his  own  person  as  the  organ  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  therefore 
an  absolutist  from  head  to  heel,  and  filled  with  the  thought,  "I,  and  none  beside  me."  He 
knrws  and  believes  that  the  Holy  Virgin,  with  whom  he  is  on  the  most  intimate  terms,  will 
inaemnify  him  for  the  loss  of  land  and  subjects  by  means  of  the  Infallibility  doctrine,  and  the 
restoration  of  the  Papal  dominion  over  states  and  peoples  as  well  as  over  churches.  He  also 
believes  firmly  in  the  miraculous  emanations  from  the  sepulchre  of  St.  Peter.  At  the  feet 
of  this  man  the  German  Bishop  flung  himself,  ^^ipso  Papa  papalior,"  a  zealot  for  the  ideal 
greatness  and  unapproachable  dignity  of  the  Papacy,  and,  at  the  same  time,  inspired  by  the 
aristocratic  feeling  of  a  Westphalian  noblema^  and  the  hierarchical  self-consciousness  of  a 
Bishop  and  successor  of  the  ancient  chancellor  of  the  empire,  while  yet  he  is  surrounded  by 
the  intellectual  atmosphere  of  Germany,  and,  with  all  his  firmness  of  belief,  is  sickly  with  the 
pallor  of  thought,  and  inwardly  struggling  with  the  terrible  misgiving  that,  after  all,  historical 
facts  are  right,  and  that  the  ship  of  the  Curia,  though  for  the  moment  it  proudly  rides  the 
waves  with  its  sails  swelled  by  a  favorable  wind,  will  be  wrecked  on  that  rock  at  last.' 

'  Quirinus,  p.  804 :  'Thus  the  Infallibilist  decree,  as  it  is  now  to  be  received  under  anathema 
by  the  Catholic  world,  is  an  eminently  Spanish  production,  as  is  fitting  for  a  doctrine  which 
was  bora  and  reared  under  the  shadow  of  the  Inquisition.' 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  '77 

resolved  to  return  forthwith  to  their  flocks,  which  had  ah'eady  too  long 
been  deprived  of  their  presence,  and  were  now  filled  with  apprehensions 
of  war.  Schwarzenberg,  Matthieu,  Simor,  and  Darboy  head  the  list 
of  signers.^  On  the  evening  of  the  same  day  not  only  the  fifty-six 
signers,  but  sixty  additional  members  of  the  opposition  departed  from 
Home,  promising  to  each  other  to  make  their  future  conduct  dependent 
on  mutual  understanding. 

This  was  tlie  turning-point :  the  opposition  broke  down  by  its  own 
act  of  cowardice.  They  ought  to  have  stood  like  men  on  the  post  of 
duty,  and  repeated  their  negative  vote  according  to  their  honest  convic- 
tions. They  could  thus  have  prevented  the  passage  of  this  momentous 
decree,  or  at  all  events  shorn  it  of  its  oecumenical  w^eight,  ai:Ki  kept  it 
open  for  future  revision  and  possible  reversal.  But  they  left  Rome  at 
the  very  moment  w^hen  their  presence  was  most  needed,  and  threw  an 
easy  victory  into  the  lap  of  the  majority. 

When,  therefore,  the  fourth  public  session  was  held,  on  the  memora- 
ble 18th  of  July  (Monday),  there  were  but  535  Fathers  present,  and  of 
these  all  voted  Placet^  with  the  exception  of  two,  viz..  Bishop  Riccio,  of 
Cajazzo,  in  Sicily,  and  Bishop  Fitzgerald,  of  Little  Bock,  Arkansas,  who 
had  the  courage  to  vote  Non  Placet^  but  immediately,  before  the  close 
of  the  session,  submitted  to  the  voice  of  the  Council.  In  tiiis  way  a 
moral  unanimity  was  secured  as  great  as  in  tlie  first  Council  of  Kicssa, 
where  likewise  two  refused  to  subscribe  the  Nicene  Creed.  ^  Wliat  a 
wise  direction  of  Providence,'  exclaimed  the  Civiltd  cattolica,  ^  535  yeas 
against  2  nays.  Oyily  two  nays,  therefore  almost  total  unanimity;  and 
yet  two  nays,  therefore  full  liberty  of  the  Council.  How  vain  are  all 
attacks  against  the  oecumenical  character  of  this  most  beautiful  of  all 
Councils !' 

After  the  vote  tlie  Pope  confirmed  the  decrees  and  canons  on  the 
Constitution  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  and  added  from  his  own  inspira- 
tion the  assurance  that  tlie  supreme  authority  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  did 
not  suppress  but  aid,  not  destroy  but  build  up,  and  formed  the  best  pro- 
tection of  the  rights  and  interests  of  the  Episcopate.^ 


*  See  the  protest  in  Friedberg,  p.  G22.     Comp.  Frommann,  p.  207. 

'  ^Summa  ista  Romani  Pontijicis  auctoritaa,  Venerabiles  Fratres,  non  opprimit  sed  adjuvat^ 
non  destruit  sed  cedijicat,  et  scepissime  confirmat  in  dignitate,  unit  in  ckaritate,  et  Fratrum^ 
scilicet  Episcoporum,  jura  Jirmat  atque  tuetur.     Ideoque  illi,  qui  nunc  judicant  in  commotionej 


7S  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

The  days  of  the  two  most  important  public  sessions  of  the  Vatican 
Council,  namely  the  first  and  the  last,  were  the  darkest  and  stormiest 
which  Kome  saw  from  Dec.  8, 1869,  to  the  18th  of  July,  1870.  The 
Episcopal  votes  and  the  Papal  proclamation  of  the  new  dogma  were 
accompanied  by  flashes  of  lightning  and  claps  of  thunder  from  the  skies, 
and  so  great  was  the  darkness  which  spread  over  the  Church  of  St.  Peter, 
that  the  Pope  could  not  read  the  decree  of  his  own  Infallibility  without 
the  artificial  light  of  a  candle.^     This  voice  of  nature  was  variously  in- 

sciant,  non  esse  in  commotione  Dominurn.  Meminerint,  quod  paucis  ahhinc  annis,  oppositam 
tenentes  sententiam,  abundaverunt  in  sensu  Nostra,  et  in  sensii  majoris  partis  hujus  amplissimi 
Consessiis,  sed  tunc  judicaverunt  in  spiritu  aurce  lenis.  Numquid  in  eodem  judicio  judicando 
dure  oppositxB  possunt  existere  conscientice  ?  Absit.  Illuminet  ergo  Deus  sensus  et  corda;  et 
quoniam  Ipse  facit  viirabilia  magna  solus,  illuminet  sensus  et  corda,  ut  omnes  accedere  possint 
ad  sinum  Patris,  Christi  Jesu  in  terris  indigni  Vicarii,  qui  eos  amat,  eos  diligit,  et  exoptat 
unum  esse  cum  illis;  et  ita  simul  in  vinculo  charitatis  conjuncti  prceliare  possimus  prvelia 
Domini,  ut  non  solum  non  irrideant  nos  inimici  nostri,  sed  timeant  potius,  et  aliquando  arma 
malitlce  cedant  in  conspectu  veritatis,  sicque  omnes  cum  D.  Augustino  dicere  valeant:  ^^Tu 
vocasti  me  in  admirabile  lumen  tuum,  et  ecce  video.^^ ' 

^  Quiriniis,  Letter  LXIX.  p.  809.  A  Protestant  eye-witness,  Prof.  Ripley,  thus  described 
the  scene  in  a  letter  from  Rome,  published  in  the  New  York  Tribune  (of  which  he  is  one  of 
the  editors)  for  Aug.  11, 1870  :  '  Rome,  July  19. — Before  leaving  Rome  I  send  you  a  report 
of  the  last  scene  of  that  absurd  comedy  called  the  Qicumenical  Vatican  Council.  ...  It  is 
at  least  a  remarkable  coincidence  that  the  opening  and  closing  sessions  of  the  Council  were 
inaugurated  with  fearful  storms,  and  that  the  vigil  of  the  promulgation  of  the  dogma  was  cele- 
brated with  thunder  and  lightning  throughout  the  whole  of  the  night.  On  the  8th  of  last 
December  I  was  nearly  drowned  by  the  floods  of  rain,  which  came  down  in  buckets  ;  yester- 
day morning  I  went  down  in  rain,  and  under  a  frowning  sky  which  menaced  terrible  storms 
later  in  the  day.  .  .  .  Kyrie  eleison  we  heard  as  soon  as  the  mass  was  said,  and  the  whole 
multitude  joined  in  singing  the  plaintive  measure  of  the  Litany  of  tlie  Saints,  and  then  with 
equal  fervor  was  sung  Veni  Creator,  which  was  followed  by  the  voice  of  a  secretary  reading 
in  a  high  key  the  dogma.  At  its  conclusion  the  names  of  the  Fathers  were  called  over,  and 
Placet  after  Placet  succeeded  ad  nauseam.  But  what  a  storm  burst  over  the  church  at  this 
moment!  The  lightning  flashed  and  the  thunder  pealed  as  we  have  not  heard  it  this  season 
before.  Every  Placet  seemed  to  be  announced  by  a  flash  and  terminated  by  a  clap  of  thun- 
der. Through  the  cupolas  the  lightning  entered,  licking,  as  it  were,  the  very  columns  of  the 
Baldachino  over  the  tomb  of  St.  Peter,  and  lighting  up  large  spaces  on  the  pavement.  Sure, 
God  was  there — but  whether  approving  or  disproving  what  was  going  on,  no  mortal  man  can 
say.  Enough  that  it  was  a  remarkable  coincidence,  and  so  it  struck  the  minds  of  all  who 
were  present.  And  thus  the  roll  was  called  for  one  hour  and  a  half,  with  this  solemn  accom- 
paniment, and  then  the  result  of  the  voting  was  taken  to  the  Pope.  The  moment  had  arrived 
when  he  was  to  declare  himself  invested  with  the  attributes  of  God — nay,  a  God  upon  earth. 
Looking  from  a  distance  into  the  hall,  which  was  obscured  by  the  tempest,  nothing  was  visible 
but  the  golden  mitre  of  the  Pope,  and  so  thick  was  the  darkness  that  a  servitor  was  compelled 
to  bring  a  lighted  candle  and  hold  it  by  his  side  to  enable  him  to  read  the  formula  by  which 
he  deified  himself.  And  then — what  is  that  indescribable  noise  ?  Is  it  the  raging  of  the  storm 
above? — the  pattering  of  hail-sto"nes  ?  It  approaches  nearer,  and  for  a  minute  I  most  seri- 
ously say  that  I  could  not  understand  what  that  swelling  sound  was  until  I  saw  a  cloud  of 
white  handkerchiefs  waving  in  the  air.     The  Fathers  had  begun  with  clapping— they  were 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  79 

terpreted,  either  as  a  condemnation  of  Gallicanism  and  liberal  Cathol- 
icism, or  as  a  divine  attestation  of  the  dogma  like  that  whicli  accom- 
panied the  promulgation  of  the  law  from  Mount  Sinai,  or  as  an  evil 
omen  of  impending  calamities  to  the  Papacy. 

And  behold,  the  day  after  the  proclamation  of  the  dogma,  Napoleon 
III.,  the  political  ally  and  supporter  of  Pius  IX.,  unchained  the  furies  of 
war,  which  in  a  few  weeks  swept  away  the  Empire  of  France  and  the 
temporal  throne  of  the  infallible  Pope.  His  own  subjects  forsook  him, 
and  almost  unanimously  voted  for  a  new  sovereign,  whom  he  had  ex- 
communicated as  the  worst  enemy  of  the  Church.  A  German  Empire 
arose  from  victorious  battle-fields,  and  Protestantism  sprung  to  the  po- 
litical and  military  leadership  of  Europe.  About  half  a  dozen  Prot- 
estant Churches  have  since  been  organized  in  Kome,  where  none  was 
tolerated  before,  except  outside  of  the  walls  or  in  the  house  of  some 
foreign  embassador;  a  branch  of  the  Bible  Society  was  established, 
which  the  Pope  in  his  Syllabus  denounces  as  a  pest ;  and  a  public  de- 
bate was  held  in  which  even  tlie  presence  of  Peter  at  Home  was  called 
in  question.  History  records  no  more  striking  example  of  swift  retri- 
bution of  criminal  ambition.  Once  before  the  tapacy  was  shaken  to 
its  base  at  the  very  moment  when  it  felt  itself  most  secure :  Leo  X.  had 
hardly  concluded  the  fifth  and  last  Lateran  Council  in  March,  1517, 
with  a  celebi-ation  of  victory,  when  an  humble  monk  in  the  North  of 
Europe  sounded  the  key-note  of  the  great  Peformation. 

What  did  the  Bishops  of  the  minority  do  ?  They  all  submitted,  even 
those  who  had  been  most  vigorous  in  opposing,  not  only  the  opportu- 
nity of  the  definition,  but  the  dogma  itself.  Some  hesitated  long,  but 
yielded  at  last  to  the  heavy  pressure.  Cardinal  Pauscher,  of  Vienna, 
published  the  decree  already  in  August,  and  afterwards  withdrew  his 
powerful  'Observations  on  the  Infallibility  of  the  Church'  from  the 
market;  regarding  this  as  an  act  of  glorious  self-denial  for  the  wel- 
fare of  the  Church.  Cardinal  Schwarzenberg,  of  Prague,  waited  with 
the  publication  till  Jan.  11, 1871,  and  shifted  the  responsibility  upon  his 


the  fuglemen  to  the  crowd  who  took  up  the  notes  and  signs  of  rejoicing  until  the  church  of 
God  was  converted  into  a  theatre  for  the  exhibition  of  human  passions.  *'  Viva  Pio  Nono .'" 
''Viva  il  Papa  Infaltibile  T  '■'Viva  il  trionfo  dei  Cattolici  T'  were  shouted  by  this  priestlj 
assembly ;  and  again  another  round  they  had ;  and  yet  another  was  attempted  as  soon  as  the 
Te  Deum  had  been  sung  and  the  benediction  had  been  given.' 


so  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

theological  advisers.  Bishop  Ilefele,  of  Rottenburg,  who  has  f oi'gotten 
more  about  the  history  of  Councils  than  the  infallible  Pope  ever  knew, 
after  delaying  till  April  10, 1871,  submitted,  not  because  he  had  changed 
his  conviction,  but,  as  he  says,  because  'the  peace  and  unity  of  the 
Church  is  so  great  a  good  that  great  and  heavy  personal  sacrifices  may 
be  made  for  it ;'  i.  e.,  truth  must  be  sacrificed  to  peace.  Bishop  Maret, 
who  wrote  two  learned  volumes  against  Papal  InfalHbility  and  in  de- 
fense of  Gallicanism,  declared  in  his  retractation  that  he  '  wholly  re- 
jects every  thing  in  his  work  which  is  opposed  to  the  dogma  of  the 
Council,'  and  '  withdraws  it  from  sale.'  Archbishop  Kenrick  yielded, 
but  has  not  refuted  his  Concio  hahenda  at  non  habita,  which  remains 
an  irrefragable  argument  against  the  new  dogma.  Even  Strossmayer, 
the  boldest  of  the  bold  in  the  minority,  lost  his  courage,  and  keeps 
his  peace.  Darboy  died  a  martyr  in  the  revolt  of  the  communists  of 
Paris,  in  April,  1871.  In  a  conversation  with  Dr.  Michaud,  Yicar  of 
St.  Madeleine,  who  since  seceded  from  Pome,  he  counseled  external 
and  official  submission,  with  a  mental  reservation,  and  in  the  hope  of 
better  times.  His  successor,  Msgr.  Guibert,  published  the  decrees  a 
year  later  (April,  1872),  without  asking  the  permission  of  the  head  of 
the  French  Republic.  Of  those  opponents  who,  though  not  members 
of  the  Council,  carried  as  great  weight  as  any  Prelate,  Montalembert 
died  daring  the  Council;  Newman  kept  silence;  Pere  Gratry,  who 
had  declared  and  proved  that  the  question  of  Ilonorius  '  is  totally  gan- 
grened by  fraud,'  wrote  from  his  death-bed  at  Montreux,  in  Switzer- 
land (Feb.  1872),  to  the  new  Archbishop  of  Paris,  that  he  submitted  to 
the  Vatican  Council,  and  effaced  '  every  thing  to  the  contrary  he  may 
have  written.' 1 

It  is  said  that  the  adhesion  of  the  minority  Bishops  was  extorted  by 
the  threat  of  the  Pope  not  to  renew  their  'quinquennial  faculties' 
{facultates  quinquen7iales),  that  is,  the  Papal  licenses  renewed  every 
five  years,  permitting  them  to  exercise  extraordinary  episcopal  func- 
tions which  ordinarily  belong  to  the  Pope,  as  the  power  of  absolving 
from  heresy,  schism,  apostasy,  secret  crime  (except  murder),  from  vows, 
duties  of  fasting,  the  power  of  permitting  the  reading  of  prohibited 

*  See  details  on  the  reception  and  publication  of  the  Vatican  decrees  in  Friedberg,  pp.  ~>?> 
sqq.,  775  sqq.  ;  Frommann,  pp.  215-230  ;  on  Gratry,  the  Annales  de  Philosophie  Chretienne, 
Sept.  1871,  p.  236. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  81 

books  (for  the  purpose  of  refutation),  marrying  within  prohibited  de- 
grees, etc.^ 

But,  aside  from  this  pressure,  the  following  considerations  sufficiently 
explain  the  fact  of  submission. 

1.  Many  of  the  dissenting  Bishops  were  professedly  anti-Infallibilists, 
not  from  principle,  but  only  from  subordinate  considerations  of  expe- 
diency, because  they  apprehended  that  the  definition  would  provoke 
the  hostility  of  secular  governments,  and  inflict  great  injury  on  Catholic 
interests,  especially  in  Protestant  countries.  Events  have  since  proved 
that  their  apprehension  was  well  founded. 

2.  All  Boman  Bishops  are  under  an  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  Pope, 
which  binds  them  '  to  preserve,  defend,  increase,  and  advance  the  rights, 
honors,  privileges,  and  authority  of  the  holy  Boman  Cliurch,  of  our  lord 
the  Pope,  and  his  successors.' 

3.  The  minority  Bishops  defended  Episcopal  infallibility  against  Pa- 
pal infallibility.  They  claimed  for  themselves  what  they  denied  to  the 
Pope.  Admitting  the  infallibility  of  an  oecumenical  Council,  and  for- 
feiting by  their  voluntary  absence  on  the  day  of  voting  the  right  of 
their  protest,  they  must  either  on  their  own  theory  accept  the  decision 
of  the  Council,  or  give  up  their  theory,  cease  to  be  Boman  Catholics, 
and  run  the  risk  of  a  new  schism. 

At  the  same  time  this  submission  is  an  instructive  lesson  of  the  fear- 
ful spiritual  despotism  of  the  Papacy,  which  overrules  the  stubborn 
facts  of  history  and  the  sacred  claims  of  individual  conscience.  For 
the  facts  so  clearly  and  forcibly  brought  out  before  and  during  the 
Council  by  such  men  as  Kenrick,  Hefele,  Bauscher,  Maret,  Schwarzen- 
berg,  and  Dupanloup,  have  not  changed,  and  can  never  be  undone.  On 
the  one  hand  we  find  the  results  of  a  life-long,  conscientious,  and  thor- 
ough study  of  the  most  learned  divines  of  the  Boman  Church,  on  < 
the  other  ignorance,  prejudice,  perversion,  and  defiance  of  Scripture 
and  tradition ;  on  the  one  hand  we  have  history  shaping  theology,  on 
the  other  theology  ignoring  or  changing  history ;  on  the  one  hand  the 
just  exercise  of  reason,  on  the  other  blind  submission,  which  destroys 
reason  and  conscience.     But  truth  must  and  will  prevail  at  last.  \ 

^  See  the  article  Facultaten,  in  Wetzer  und  Weltb's  KirchenUxikon  oder  Emyklop.  der 
katholischen  T/ieologie^Yol.  III.  pp.  879  sqq. 

F 


82  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCII* 


Papal  Infallibility  Explained,  and  Tested  by  Tkadition  and 

sckiptuke. 

Literature. 
1.  Foe*Infai.libilitt. 

The  older  defenders  of  Infallibility  are  chiefly  Bem-armin,  Ballkrini,  Litta,  Alphons  de  Liqloei 
(whom  the  Pope  raised  to  the  dignity  of  a  dbctor  ecclesice,  March  11,1872),  Card.  Oesi,  Peebone,  and  Jo- 
BKPn  Count  de  Matstek  (Sardinian  statesman,  d.  at  Turin  Feb.  26, 1821,  author  of  Du  Pape,  1819 ;  new 
edition,  Paris,  1843,  with  the  Homeric  motto:  el?  Kolpavo^:  eVro)). 

During  and  after  the  Vatican  Council :  the  works  of  Archbishops  Manning  and  Dechamps,  already 
quoted,  pp.  134, 135. 

Jos.  CAsnoNi  (Archbishop  of  Edessa,  in  partibus) :  Elucubratio  de  dogmatica  Romani  Pontificis  Infal- 
libilitate  ejusqxie  Definibilitate,  Romse  (typis  Civilitatis  Cattolicae),  1870  (May,  174  pp.).  The  chief  work 
on  the  Papal  side,  clothed  with  a  semi-official  character. 

Hermann  Rump  :  Die  Unfehlharkeit  des  Papstes  und  die  Stellung  der  in  Deutschland  verbreiteten  theolo- 
giftchen  Lehrbuchcr  zu  dieser  Lehre,  Miinster,  1870  (173  pp.). 

Feanz  Feieduoff  (Prof,  at  Miinster) »  Gegen-Erwugungeti  uber  die  pdpatliche  Unfehlharkeit,  Miinster, 

1869  (21  pp.).    Superficial. 

Fi-OE.  R1E88  and  Kart.  von  Webke  (Jesuits) :  Das  Oekum.  Concil.  Stimmen  aus  Maria-Laach,  Neue  Folge, 
No.  X.    Die  pupstliche  Unfehlbarkeit  und  der  alte  Glaube  der  Kirche,  Freiburg  im  Breisgau,  1870  (110  pp.). 

G.  Biokel:  Grundefur  die  Unfehlbarkeit  des  Kirchenoberhauptes  nebst  Widerlegung  der  Einwurfe,  Miin- 
Bter,  1870. 

Rev.  P.  Weninger  (Jesuit) :  LHnfaillibilite  du  Pape  devant  la  raison  et  Vecriture,  les  papes  et  les  can- 
dles, les  peres  et  les  theologiens,  les  rois  et  les  empcreurs.  Translated  from  the  German  into  French  by 
P.  Belet.  (Highly  spoken  of  by  Pius  IX.  in  a  brief  to  Abbe  Belet,  Nov.  17, 1809 ;  see  Friedberg,  1.  c. 
p.  487.  Weninger  wrote  besides  several  pamphlets  on  Infallibility  in  German,  Innsbruck,  1841 ;  Graz, 
1853 ;  in  English,  New  York  and  Cincinnati,  1868.  Archbishop  Kenrick,  in  his  Concio,  speaks  of  him  as 
'a  pious  and  extremely  zealous  but  ignorant  man,'  whom  he  honored  with  *  the  charity  of  silence'  when 
requested  to  recommend  one  of  his  books.) 

Widerlegung  der  vier  unter  die  Vuter  des  Concils  vertheilten  Broehuren  gegen  die  Unfehlbarkeit  (transl. 
of  Animadversiones  in  qtiattwr  contra  Romani  Pontificis  infallibilitatem  editos  libellos),  Miinster,  1870. 

Bishop  Jos.  Fesslee:  Die  wahre  und  die  falsche  Unfehlbarkeit  der  Pdpste  (against  Prof,  von  Schulte), 
Wien,  1871. 

Bishop  Ketteler  :  Das  unfehlbare  Lehramt  des  Papstes,  nach  der  Entscheidwig  des  Vaticanischen  Con^ 
cils,  Mainz,  1871, 3te  Aufl. 

M.  J.  Scheeben  :  Schulte  und  D'llinger,  gegen  das  Concil.  Kritische  Beleuchtung,  etc.,  Regensbnrg,  1871. 

Prof.  Amedee  de  Maegeeie  :  Lettre  au  R.  P.  Gratrg  sur  le  Pape  Ilonorius  et  le  Breviaire  /{omain, Nancy, 
1870. 

II.  Against  Infallicilitt. 

(a)  By  Members  of  the  Council. 

Mgr.  H.  L.  C.  Maret  (Bishop  of  Sura,  in  part..  Canon  of  St.  Denis  and  Dean  of  the  Theological  Faculty 
in  Paris) :  Du  Concile  general  et  de  la  paix  religieuse,  Paris,  1869,  2  Tom.  (pp.  554  and  555).  An  elaborate 
defense  of  Gallicanism  ;  since  revoked  by  the  author,  and  withdrawn  from  sale. 

Peter  Riouard  Keneiok  (Archbishop  of  St.  Louis) :  Concio  in  Concilio  Vaticano  habendaat  ^lon  habita, 
Neapoli  (typis  fratrum  de  Angelis  in  via  Pellegrini  4),  1870.  Reprinted  in  Friedrich,  Documenta,  I.  pp.  187- 
226.  An  English  translation  in  L.  W.  Bacon's  A  n  Imide  View  of  the  Vatican  Council,  New  York,  pp.  90-166. 

QUiESTio  (no  place  or  date  of  publication).  A  very  able  Latin  dissertation  occasioned  and  distributed 
(perhaps  partly  prepared)  by  Bishop  Ketteler,  of  Mayence,  during  the  Council.  It  was  printed  but  not 
published  in  Switzerland,  in  1870,  and  reprinted  in  Friedrich,  Documenta,  I.  pp.  1-128. 

La  liberie  du  Concile  et  Vinfaillibilite.  Written  or  inspired  by  Daeboy,  Archbishop  of  Paris.  Only  fifty 
copies  were  printed,  for  distribution  among  the  Cardinals.  Reprinted  in  Friedrich,  Documenta,  I.  pp. 
129-1S6. 

Card.RAUscuEE:  Observationes  qucedam  de  infallibilitatis  ecclesice  sufc/ccto,  Neapoli  and  Vindobona?, 

1870  (83  pp.). 

De  Summi  Pontificis  infallibilitate  personal/,  Neapoli,  1870  (32  pp.).  Written  by  Prof.  Salesius  Mayer, 
and  distributed  in  the  Council  by  Cardinal  Schwarzenberg. 

Jos.  DE  Hefele  (Bishop  of  Rottenburg,  formerly  Prof,  at  Tubingen) :  Causa  Ilonorii  Papce,  Neap.  1870 
(pp.28).  The  same:  Honorius  und  das  sechste  allgemeine  Co«cr7  (with  an  appendix  against  Pennachi, 
43  pp.),  Tiibingen,  1870.  English  translation,  with  introduction,  by  Dr.  Heney  B.  Smith,  in  the  Presby- 
terian Qrutrierly  and  l^inceton  Review,  New  York,  for  April,  1872,  pp.  273  sqq.  Against  Hefele  comp. 
Jos.  Penn  Aoui  (Prof,  of  Church  History  in  Rome) :  De  Honorii  L  Pontificis  Romani  causa  in  Concilio  VI. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  83 

(6)  By  Catholics,  not  Members  of  the  Council. 

Janus  :  The  Pope  a^id  the  Council,  1869.    See  above,  p.  134. 

Erwagungen  fur  die  Bischofe  des  Conciliuma  iiber  die  Frage  der  papstlichen  Un/ehlbarkeit,  Oct.  1869. 
Dritte  Aufl.  Miincheu.     [By  J.  von  Dollinokb.] 

J.  VON  DoLLiNOER :  Einige  Worte  fiber  die  Lrr?/(?W6arA;erYsadres8e,  etc.,  Miinchen,  1870. 

Jos.  H.  Reinkens  (Prof,  of  Church  History  iu  Breslau) :  Ueber  pupstliche  Un/ehlbarkeit,'M.iiuche}),1810. 

Clemens  Sohmitz  (Cath.  Priest) :  M  der  Papst  uv/ehlbar  f  Aua  Deutschlands  und  des  P.  Deharbe  Cate- 
chismen  beantwortet,  Miincheu,  1870. 

J.  Fb.  Ritteb  von  Souulte  (Prof,  in  Prague,  now  in  Bonn) :  Das  Un/ehlbarkeits-Decret  vom  18  Juli 
1870  av/  seine  Verbindlichkeit  gepri/ft,  Prague,  1870.  Die  Macht  der  ri'mi.  Papste  uber  Fursten,  Lander, 
Volker,  etc.  seit  Gregor  VII.  zur  Wiirdigung  ihrer  Unfehlbarkeit  beleuchtet,  etc.,  2d  edition,  Prague.  The 
same,  translated  into  English  {The  Power  of  the  Roman  Popes  over  Princes,  etc.),  by  Alfred  Somers  [a 
brother  of  Schulte],  Adelaide,  1871. 

A.  Geatky  (Priest  of  the  Oratoire  and  Member  of  the  French  Academy) :  Four  Letters  to  the  Bishop  of 
Orleans  (Dupanloup)  and  the  Archbishop  of  Malines  (Dechamps),  in  French,  Paris,  1870;  several  editions, 
also  translated  into  German,  English,  etc.  These  learned  and  eloquent  letters  gave  rise  to  violent  con- 
troversies. They  were  denounced  by  several  Bishops,  and  prohibited  in  their  dioceses ;  approved  by 
others,  and  by  Montalembert.  The  Pope  praised  the  opponents.  Against  him  wrote  Dechamps  (Three 
Letters  to  Gratry,  in  French ;  German  translation,  Mayeuce,  1870)  and  A.  de  Margerie.  Gratry  recanted 
on  his  death-bed. 

P.  Le  Page  Renouf  :  !7%e  Case  of  Pope  Honorius,  Lond.  1869.    • 

Antonio  Maqkassi:  Lo  Schema  suW  infallibilitd  personale  del  Romano  Pontefice,  Alessandria,  1870 
<64pp.). 

Delia  pretesa  infallibilitd  personale  del  Romano  Pontefice,  2d  ed.,  FIrenze,  1870  (Anonymous,  80  pp.). 

J.  A.  B.  LuTTEBBECK :  Die  Clementinen  und  ihr  Verhdltniss  zuvi  Unfehlbarkeitsdogma,  Giessen,  1872 
(pp.85). 

The  sinlessness  of  the  Virgin  Mary  and  the  personal  infallibility  of 
the  Pope  are  the  characteristic  dogmas  of  modern  Romanism,  the  two 
test  dogmas  which  must  decide  the  ultimate  fate  of  this  system.  Both 
were  enacted  under  the  same  Pope,  and  both  faithfully  reflect  his  char- 
acter. Both  have  the  advantage  of  logical  consistency  from  certain 
premises,  and  seem  to  be  the  yovj  perfection  of  the  Romish  form  of 
piety  and  the  Romish  principle  of  authority.  Both  rest  on  pious  fiction 
and  fraud ;  both  present  a  refined  idolatry  by  clothing  a  pure  humble 
woman  and  a  mortal  sinful  man  with  divine  attributes.  The  dogma 
of  the  Immaculate  Conception,  which  exempts  the  Virgin  Mary  from 
sin  and  guilt,  perverts  Christianism  into  Marianism ;  the  dogma  of  In- 
fallibility, w^iich  exempts  the  Bishop  of  Home  from  error,  resolve? 
Catholicism  into  Papalism,  or  the  Church  into  the  Pope.  The  wor- 
ship of  a  woman  is  virtually  substituted  for  the  worship  of  Christ,  and 
a  man-god  in  Rome  for  tlie  God-Man  in  heaven.  This  is  a  severe 
judgment,  but  a  closer  examination  will  sustain  it. 

The  dogma  of  the  Immaculate  Conception,  being  confined  to  the 
sphere  of  devotion,  passed  into  the  modern  Roman  creed  without  seri^ 
ous  difficulty ;  but  the  dogma  of  Papal  Infallibility,  which  involves  a 
question  of  absolute  power,  forms  an  epoch  in  the  history  of  Roman- 
ism, and  created  the  greatest  commotion  and  a  new  secession.  It  is 
in  its  very  nature  the  most  fundamental  and  most  comprehensive  of 


84  HISTOKY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL; 

of  all  dogmas.  It  contains  the  whole  system  in  a  nutshell.  It  con- 
stitutes a  new  rule  of  faith.  It  is  the  article  of  the  standing  or  fall- 
ing Church.  It  is  the  direct  antipode  of  the  Protestant  principle  of  the 
absolute  supremacy  and  infallibility  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  It  estab- 
lishes a  perpetual  divine  oracle  in  the  Vatican.  Every  Catholic  may 
hereafter  say,  I  believe — not  because  Christ,  or  the  Bible,  or  the  Church, 
but — because  the  infalUble  Pope  has  so  declared  and  commanded. 
Admitting  this  dogma,  we  admit  not  only  the  whole  body  of  doctrines 
contained  in  the  Tridentine  standards,  but  all  the  official  Papal  balls, 
including  the  mediaeval  monstrosities  of  the  Syllabus  (1864),  the  con- 
demnation of  Jansenism,  the  bull  '  Unam  Sanctam^  of  Boniface  VIIL 
(1302),  w^hich,  under  pain  of  damnation,  claims  for  the  Pope  the  double 
sword,  the  secular  as  well  as  the  spiritual,  over  the  whole  Christian 
world,  and  the  power  to  depose  princes  and  to  absolve  subjects  from 
their  oath  of  allegiance.^  The  past  is  irreversibly  settled,  and  in  all 
future  controversies  on  faith  and  morals  we  must  look  to  the  same 
unerrinor  tribunal  in  the  Vatican.  Even  oecumenical  Councils  are 
superseded  hereafter,  and  would  be  a  mere  waste  of  time  and 
strength. 

On  the  other  hand,  if  the  dogma  is  false,  it  involves  a  blasphemous 
assumption,  and  makes  the  nearest  approach  to  the  fulfillment  of 
St.  Paul's  prophecy  of  the  man  of  sin,  who  '  as  God  sitteth  in  the 
temple  of  God,  showing  himself  off  that  he  is  God'  (2  Thess.  ii.  4). 

Let  us  first  see  what  the  dogma  does  not  mean,  and  what  it  does 
mean. 

It  does  not  mean  that  the  Pope  is  infallible  in  his  private  opinions 
on  theology  and  religion.^  As  a  man,  he  may  be  a  heretic  (as  Liberius, 
Honorius,  and  John  XXII.),  or  even  an  unbeliever  (as  John  XXIII., 


'^  This  bull  has  been  often  disowned  by  Catholics  (e.  g.,  by  the  Universities  of  Sorbonne, 
Louvain,  Alcala,  8alamanca,  when  officially  asked  by  Mr.  Pitt,  Prime  Minister  of  Great  Brit- 
ain, 1788,  also  by  Martin  John  Spalding,  Archbishop  of  Baltimore,  in  his  Lectures  on 
Evidences,  1866),  and,  to  some  extent,  even  by  Pius  IX.  (see  Friedberg,  p.  718),  but  it  is 
unquestionably  official,  and  was  renewed  and  approved  by  the  fifth  Lateran  Council,  Dec. 
19, 1516.  Paul  III.  and  Pius  V.  acted  upon  it,  the  former  in  excommunicating  and  depos- 
ing Henry  VIIL  of  England,  the  latter  in  deposing  Queen  Elizabeth,  exciting  her  subjects 
to  rebellion,  and  urging  Pliilip  of  Spain  to  declare  war  against  her  (see  the  Bullarium  Rom., 
Camden,  Burnet,  Froude,  etc.).  The  Papal  Syllabus  sanctions  it  by  implication,  in  No.  23, 
which  condemns  as  an  error  the  opinion  that  Roman  Pontiffs  have  exceeded  the  limits  of 
their  power. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  85 

and,  perhaps,  Leo  X.),  and  yet,  at  the  same  time,  infallible  as  Pope, 
after  the  fashion  of  Balaam  and  Kaiplias. 

Nor  does  it  mean  that  infallibility  extends  beyond  the  proper  sphere 
of  religion  and  the  Church.  The  Pope  may  be  ignorant  of  science  and 
literature,  and  make  grave  mistakes  in  his  political  administration,  or 
be  misinformed  on  matters  of  fact  (unless  necessarily  involved  in  doc- 
trinal decisions),  and  yet  be  infallible  in  defining  articles  of  faith.^ 

Infallibility  does  not  imply  impeccability.  And  yet  freedom  from 
error  and  freedom  from  sin  are  so  nearly  connected  in  men's  minds 
that  it  seems  utterly  impossible  that  such  moral  monsters  as  Alexander 
YI.  and  those  infamous  Popes  who  disgraced  humanity  during  the 
Koman  pornocracy  in  the  tenth  and  eleventh  centuries,  should  have 
been  vicars  of  Jesus  Christ  and  infallible  organs  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
If  the  inherent  infallibijity  of  the  visible  Church  logically  necessitates 
the  infallibility  of  the  visible  head,  it  is  difficult  to  see  why  the  same 
logic  should  not  with  equal  conclusiveness  derive  the  personal  holiness 
of  the  head  from  the  holiness  of  the  body. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  dogma  does  mean  that  all  official  utterances 
of  the  Eoman  Pontiff  addressed  to  the  Catholic  Church  on  matters  of 
Christian  faith  and  duty  are  infallibly  true,  and  must  be  accepted  with 
the  same  faith,  as  the  word  of  the  living  God.  They  are  not  simply 
final  in  the  sense  in  which  all  decisions  of  an  absolute  government  or 
a  supreme  court  of  justice  are  final  until  abolished  or  superseded  by 
other  decisions,^  but  they  are  irreformable,  and  can  never  be  revoked. 
This  infallibility  extends  over  eighteen  centuries,  and  is  a  special  privi- 
lege conferred  by  Christ  upon  Peter,  and  through  him  upon  all  his  legiti- 
mate successors.  It  belongs  to  every  Pope  from  Clement  to  Pius  IX., 
and  to  every  Papal  bull  addressed  to  the  Catholic  world.     It  is  per- 


*  Pope  Pius  IX.  started  as  a  political  reformer,  and  set  in  motion  that  revolution  which, 
notwithstanding  his  subsequent  reactionary  course,  resulted  in  the  unification  of  Italy  and 
the  loss  of  the  States  of  the  Church,  against  which  he  now  so  bitterly  protests. 

'  In  this  general  sense  Joseph  de  Maistre  explains  infallibility  to  be  the  same  in  the  spir- 
itual order  that  sovereignty  means  in  the  civil  order :  'Z'?«n  et  Vautre  exprivient  cette  haute 
puissance  qui  les  domine  toutes,  dont  toutes  les  autres  d^rivent,  qui  gouverne  et  nest  pas  gou- 
vernee,  qui  jug  e  et  n'estpasjugde.  Quand  nous  disons  que  V  Eg  Use  est  infaillible,  nous  ne  de- 
mandons  pour  elle,  il  est  hien  esseniiel  de  Vohserver,  aucun privilege  particulier ;  nous  demandons 
seulement  qu'ellejouisse  du  droit  commun  a  toutes  les  souverainet^s  possible  qui  toutes  agisscnt 
n^cessairement  comine  infaillibles ;  car  tout  gouvernement  est  absolu;  et  du  moment  ou  fon  pent 
lui  r€sister  sous pr€iexte  d'erreur  ou  dHnjustice^  il  n'existe  plus.'    Du  Pape,  ch.  i.,  pp.  15, 16. 


86  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

sonal,  i.  e.,  inherent  in  Peter  and  the  Popes;  it  is  independent,  and 
needs  no  confirmation  from  the  Church  or  an  oecumenical  Council, 
eitlier  preceding  or  succeeding;  its  decrees  are  binding,  and  can  not  be 
rejected  without  running  the  risk  of  eternal  damnation.^ 

Even  within  the  narrow  limits  of  the  Vatican  decision  there  is  room 
for  controversy  on  the  precise  meaning  of»the  figurative  term  ex  cathe- 
dra loqid,  and  the  extent  of  faith  and  mfiorals^  viz.,  w^hether  Infallibil- 
ity includes  only  the  supernatural  order  of  revealed  truth  and  dutj^,  or 
also  natural  and  political  duties,  and  questions  of  mere  history,  such  as 
Peter's  residence  in  Rome,  the  number  of  oecumenical  Councils,  the 
teaching  of  Jansen  and  Quesnel,  and  other  disputed  facts  closely  con- 
nected with  dogmas.  But  the  main  point  is  clear  enough.  The  Ultra- 
montane theory  is  established,  Gallicanisni  is  dead  and  buried. 

TJltramontanism  and  Gallicanism. 

The  Vatican  dogma  is  the  natural  completion  of  the  Papal  polity,  as 
the  dogma  of  the  Immaculate  Conception  of  Mary  is  the  completion 
of  the  Papal  cultus. 

If  we  compare  the  Papal  or  Ultramontane  theory  with  the  Episcopal 
or  Galilean  theory,  it  has  the  undeniable  advantage  of  logical  consist- 
ency. The  two  systems  are  related  to  each  other  like  monarchy  and 
aristocracy,  or  rather  like  absolute  monarchy  and  limited  monarchy. 
The  one  starts  from  the  divine  institution  of  the  Primacy  (Matt.  xvi.  18), 

*  Archbishop  Manning  (Petri  Privil.  III.  pp.  112, 113)  defines  the  doctrine  of  Infallibility 
in  this  way : 

'  1.  The  privilege  of  infallibility  is  personal,  inasmuch  as  it  attaches  to  the  Roman  Pontiff, 
the  successor  of  Peter,  as  a  public  person,  distinct  from,  but  inseparably  united  to,  the  Church; 
but  it  is  not  personal,  in  that  it  is  attached,  not  to  the  private  person,  but  to  the  primacy 
which  he  alone  possesses. 

'  2.  It  is  also  independent,  inasmuch  as  it  does  not  depend  upon  either  the  Ecclesia  docens 
or  the  Ecclesia  discens ;  but  it  is  not  independent,  in  that  it  depends  in  all  things  upon  the 
divine  head  of  the  Church,  upon  the  institution  of  the  primacy  by  him,  and  upon  the  assist- 
ance of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

'  3.  It  is  absolute,  inasmuch  as  it  can  be  circumscribed  by  no  human  or  ecclesiastical  law ; 
it  is  not  absolute,  in  that  it  is  circumscribed  by  the  office  of  guarding,  expounding,  and  de- 
fending the  deposit  of  revelation. 

'  4.  It  is  separate  in  no  sense,  nor  can  be,  nor  can  be  so  called,  without  manifold  heresy, 
unless  the  word  be  taken  to  mean  distinct.  In  this  sense,  the  Roman  Pontiff  is  distinct  from 
the  Episcopate,  and  is  a  distinct  subject  of  infallibility;  and  in  the  exercise  of  his  supreme 
doctrinal  authority,  or  magisterium,  he  does  not  depend  for  the  infallibility  of  his  definitions 
upon  the  consent  or  consultation  of  the  Episcopate,  but  only  on  the  divine  assistance  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.' 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  87 

and  teaches  the  infallibility  of  the  head ;  the  other  starts  from  the  di- 
vine institution  of  the  Episcopate  (Matt,  xviii.  18),  and  teaches  the  infal- 
libility of  the  body  and  the  superiority  of  an  oecumenical  Council  over 
the  Pope.  Conceding  once  the  infallibility  of  the  collective  Episcopate, 
we  must  admit,  as  a  consequence,  the  infallibility  of  the  Primacy,  which 
represents  the  Episcopate,  aiid  forms  its  visible  and  permanent  centre.  If 
the  body  of  the  teaching  Church  can  never  err,  the  head  can  not  err;  and, 
vice  versa,  if  the  head  is  liable  to  error,  the  body  can  not  be  free  from 
error.  The  Galhcan  theory  is  an  untenable  via  media.  It  secures  only 
,a  periodic  and  intermittent  infallibility,  which  reveals  itself  in  an  oecu- 
menical Council,  and  then  relapses  into  a  quiescent  state ;  but  the  Ultra- 
montane theory  teaches  an  unbroken,  ever  living,  and  ever  active  infalli- 
bility, which  alone  can  fully  answer  the  demands  of  an  absolute  authority. 

To  refute  Papal  infallibility  is  to  refute  also  Episcopal  infallibility; 
for  tlie  higher  includes  the  lower.  The  Vatican  Council  is  the  best  ai-gu- 
ment  against  the  infallibility  of  oecumenical  Councils,  for  it  sanctioned 
a  fiction,  in  open  and  irreconcilable  contradiction  to  older  oecumenical 
Councils,  which  not  only  assumed  the  possibility  of  Papal  fallibility, 
but  actually  condemned  a  Pope  as  a  heretic.  The  fifth  Lateran  Coun 
oil  (1512)  declared  the  decrees  of  the  Council  of  Pisa  (1409)  null  and ' 
toid ;  the  Council  of  Florence  denied  the'  validity  of  the  Council  of 
Basle,  and  this  denied  the  validity  of  the  former.  The  Council  of  Con- 
stance condemned  and  burned  John  Hus  for  teaching  evangelical  doc- 
trines; and  this  fact  forced  upon  Luther,  at  the  disputation  with  Eck  at 
Leipzig,  the  conviction  that  even  oecumenical  Councils  may  err.  Pome 
itself  has  rejected  certain  canons  of  Constantinople  and  Chalcedon, 
which  put  the  Pope  on  a  par  with  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople ;  and 
a  strict  construction  of  the  Papal  theory  would  rule  out  the  old  oecu- 
menical Councils,  because  they  were  not  convened  nor  controlled  by  the 
Pope ;  while  the  Greek  Church  rejects  all  Councils  which  were  purely 
Latin. 

The  Bible  makes  no  provision  and  has  no  promise  for  an  oecumenical 
Council.^  The  Church  existed  and  flourished  for  more  than  three  hun- 
dred years  before  such  a  Council  was  heard  of.    Large  assemblies  are 

^  The  Synod  of  Jerusalem,  composed  of  Apostles,  Elders,  and  Brethren,  and  legislating  in 
favor  of  Christian  liberty,  differs  very  widely  from  a  purely  hierarchical  Council,  which  ex- 
eludes  Elders  and  Brethren,  and  imposes  new  burdens  upon  the  conscience. 


88  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

often  ruled  by  passion,  intrigue,  and  worldly  ambition  (remember  the 
complaints  of  Gregory  of  Nazianzum  on  the  Synods  of  the  Nicene  age). 
Majorities  are  not  necessarily  decisive  in  matters  of  faith.  Christ  prom- 
ised to  be  even  with  two  or  three  who  are  gathered  in  his  name  (Matt, 
xviii.  20).  Elijah  and  the  seven  thousand  who  had  not  bowed  the 
knee  to  Baal  were  right  over  against  the  great  mass  of  the  people  of 
Israel.  Athanasius  versus  mundum  represented  the  truth,  and  the 
world  versus  Athanasimn  was  in  error  during  the  ascendency  of 
Arianism.  In  the  eighteenth  century  the  Church,  both  Catholic  and 
Protestant,  was  under  the  power  of  infidelity,  and  true  Christianity 
had  to  take  refuge  in  small  communities.  Augustine  maintained  that 
one  Council  may  correct  another,  and  attain  to  a  more  perfect  knowl- 
edge of  truth.  Tlie  liistory  of  the  Church  is  unintelligible  without  the 
theory  of  progressive  development,  which  implies  many  obstructions 
and  temporary  diseases.  All  the  attributes  of  the  Church  are  subject 
to  the  law- of  gradual  expansion  and  growth,  and  will  not  be  finally 
complete  till  the  second  coming  of  our  Lord. 

The  Infallibility  of  the  Pojpe  and  Personal  Besj>onsihility. 

The  Christian  Church,  as  a  divine  institution,  can  never  fail  and 
never  lose  the  truth.  Christ  has  pledged  his  Spirit  and  life-giving 
presence  to  his  people  to  the  end  of  time,  and  even  to  two  or  three  of 
his  humblest  disciples  assembled  in  his  name ;  yet  they  are  not  on 
that  account  infallible.  He  gave  authority  in  matters  of  discipline  to 
every  local  Church  (Matt,  xviii.  17) ;  and  yet  no  one  claims  infallibility 
to  every  congregation.  The  Holy  Spirit  will  always  guide  believers  into 
the  truth,  and  the  unerring  Word  of  God  can  never  perish.  But  local 
churches,  like  individuals,  may  fall  into  error,  and  be  utterly  destroyed 
from  the  face  of  the  earth.  The  true  Church  of  Christ  always  makes 
progress,  and  will  go  on  conquering  and  to  conquer  to  the  end  of  the 
world.  But  the  particular  churches  of  Jerusalem,  Antioch,  Alexan- 
dria, Constantinople,  Asia  Minor,  and  North  Africa,  where  once  the 
Apostles  and  St.  Augustine  taught,  have  disappeared,  or  crumbled  into 
ruin,  or  have  been  overrun  by  the  false  prophet. 

The  truth  will  ever  be  within  the  reach  of  the  sincere  inquirer 
wherever  the  gospel  is  preached  and  the  sacraments  are  rightly  admin- 
istered.    God  has  revealed  himself  plainly  enough  for  all  purposes  of 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  89 

salvation ;  and  yet  not  so  plainly  as  to  supersede  the  necessity  of  faith, 
and  to  resolve  Christianity  into  a  mathematical  demonstration.  He 
has  given  us  a  rational  mind  to  think  and  to  judge,  and  a  free  will  to 
accept  or  to  reject.  Christian  faith  is  no  blind  submission,  hut  an  intel- 
ligent assent.  It  implies  anxiety  to  inquire  as  well  as  williugne.ss  to 
receive.  We  are  expressly  directed  to  'prove  all  things,  and  to  hold  fast 
that  which  is  good '  (1  Thess.  v.  21) ;  to  try  the  spirits  whether  they  are 
of  God  (1  John  iv.  1),  and  to  refuse  obedience  even  to  an  angel  from 
heaven  if  he  preach  a  different  gospel  (Gal.  i.  8).  The  Beroean 
Jews  are  commended  as  being  more  noble  than  those  of  Thessalonica^ 
because  they  received  the  Word  with  all  readiness  of  mind,  and  yet 
searched  the  Scriptures  daily,  w^hether  those  things  were  so  (Acts  xvii. 
11).  It  was  from  the  infallible  Scriptures  alone,  and  not  from  tra- 
dition, that  Paul  and  Apollos  reasoned,  after  the  example  of  Christ, 
who  appeals  to  Moses  and  the  Prophets,  and  speaks  disparagingly  of 
the  traditions  of  the  elders  as  obscuring  the  Word  of  God  or  destroy- 
ing its  true  effect.^  , 

In  opposition  to  all  this  the  Vatican  dogma  requires  a  wholesale 
slaughter  of  the  intellect  and  will,  and  destroys  the  sense  of  personal 
responsibility.  The  fundamental  error,  the  wpioTov  \pi\)dog  of  Rome  is 
that  she  identifies  the  true  ideal  Church  of  Christ  with  the  empirical 
Church,  and  the  empirical  Church  with  the  Romish  Church,  and  the 
Romish  Church  with  the  Papacy,  and  the  Papacy  with  the  Pope,  and 
at  last  substitutes  a  mortal  man  for  the  living  Christ,  who  is  the  only 
and  ever  present  head  of  the  Church,  'which  is  his  body,  the  fullness  of 
him  who  filleth  all  in  all.'  Christ  needs  no  vicar,  and  the  very  idea 
of  a  vicar  implies  the  absence  of  the  Master.^ 

^  It  is  remarkable  that  Christ  always  uses  TrapaSocng  in  an  unfavorable  sense :  see  Matt. 
XV.  2,  3,  G;  Mark  vii.  3,  5,  8,  9,  13.  So  also  Paul:  Gal.  i.  14;  Col.  ii.  8;  while  in  1  Cor. xi. 
2,  and  2  Thess.  ii.  15 ;  iii.  6,  he  uses  the  term  in  a  good  sense,  as  identical  with  the  gospel  he 
preached. 

2  I  add  here  what  Dr.  Hodge,  of  Princeton,  says  on  the  Papal  theory  of  Infallibility  (System- 
atic Theology,  New  York,  1872,  Vol.  I.  pp.  130, 150)  :  '  There  is  something  simple  and  grand  in 
this  theory.  It  is  wonderfully  adapted  to  the  tastes  and  wants  of  men.  It  relieves  them  of  per- 
sonal responsibility.  Every  thing  is  decided  for  them.  Their  salvation  is  secured  by  merely 
submitting  to  be  saved  by  an  infiillible,  sin-pardoning,  and  grace-imparting  Church.  Many 
may  be  inclined  to  think  that  it  would  have  been  a  great  blessing  had  Christ  left  on  earth  a 
visible  representative  of  himself,  clothed  with  his  authority  to  teach  and  govern,  and  an  order 
of  men  dispersed  through  the  world  endowed  with  the  gifts  of  the  original  Apostles — men 
every  where  accessible,  to  whom  we  could  resort  in  all  times  of  difficulty  and  doubt,  and  whog« 


90  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

Papal  Infallihillty  tested  hy  Tradition, 

The  dogma  of  Papal  Infallibility  is  mainly  supported  by  an  infer- 
ential dogmatic  argument  derived  from  the  Primacy  of  Peter,  who,  as 
the  Yicar  of  Cln-ist,  must  also  share  in  his  infallibility ;  or  from  the 
nature  and  aim  of  the  Church,  which  is  to  teach  men  the  way  of  salva- 
tion, and  must  therefore  be  endowed  with  an  infallible  and  ever  avail- 
able organ  for  that  purpose,  since  God  always  provides  tlie  means  to- 
gether with  an  end.  A  full-blooded  Infallibilist,  whose  piety  consists 
in  absolute  submission  and  devotion  to  his  lord  the  Pope,  is  per- 
fectly satisfied  with  this  reasoning,  and  cares  little  or  nothing  for  the 
Bible  and  for  history,  except  so  far  as  they  suit  his  pui'pose.  If  facts 
disagree  with  his  dogmas,  all  the  worse  for  the  facts.  All  you  have  to 
do  is  to  ignore  or  to  deny  them,  or  to  force  them,  by  unnatural  inter- 
pretations, into  reluctant  obedience  to  the  dogmas.^    Bat  after  all,  even 

decisions  could  be  safely  received  as  the  decisions  of  Christ  himself.  God's  thoughts,  how- 
ever, are  not  as  our  thoughts.  We  know  that  when  Christ  was  on  earth  men  did  not  believe 
or  obey  him.  We  know  that  when  the  Apostles  were  still  living,  and  their  authority  was 
still  confirmed  by  signs,  and  wonders,  and  divers  miracles  and  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the 
Church  was  distracted  by  heresies  and  schisms.  If  any  in  their  sluggishness  are  disposed  to 
think  that  a  perpetual  body  of  infallible  teachers  Avould  be  a  blessing,  all  must  admit  that  the 
assumption  of  infallibility  by  the  ignorant,  the  erring,  and  the  wicked,  must  be  an  evil  incon- 
ceivably great.  The  Romish  theory,  if  true,  might  be  a  blessing;  if  false,  it  must  be  an  aw- 
ful curse.  That  it  is  false  may  be  demonstrated  to  the  satisfaction  of  all  who  do  not  wish  it 
to  be  true,  and  who,  unlike  the  Oxford  tractarian,  are  not  determined  to  believe  it  because 
they  love  it.  ...  If  the  Church  be  infallible,  its  authority  is  no  less  absolute  in  the  sphere  of 
social  and  political  life.  It  is  immoral  to  contract  or  to  continue  an  unlawful  marriage,  to 
keep  an  unlawful  oath,  to  enact  unjust  laws,  to  obey  a  sovereign  hostile  to  the  Church.  The 
Church,  therefore,  has  the  right  to  dissolve  marriages,  to  free  men  from  the  obligations  of 
their  oaths,  and  citizens  from  their  allegiance,  to  abrogate  civil  laws,  and  to  depose  sovereigns. 
These  prerogatives  have  not  only  been  claimed,  but  time  and  again  exercised  by  the  Church 
of  Rome.  They  all  of  right  belong  to  that  Church,  if  it  be  infallible.  As  these  claims  aie 
enforced  by  penalties  involving  the  loss  of  the  soul,  they  can  not  be  resisted  by  those  who  ad- 
mit the  Church  to  be  infallible.  It  is  obvious,  therefore,  that  where  this  doctrine  is  held  there 
can  be  no  liberty  of  opinion,  no  freedom  of  conscience,  no  civil  or  political  freedom.  As  the 
recent  oecumenical  Council  of  the  Vatican  has  decided  that  this  infallibility  is  vested  in  the 
Pope,  it  is  henceforth  a  matter  of  faith  with  Romanists,  that  the  Roman  Pontitf  is  the  abso- 
lute sovereign  of  the  world.  All  men  are  bound,  on  the  penalty  of  eternal  death,  to  believe 
what  he  declares  to  be  true,  and  to  do  whatever  he  decides  is  obligatory.' 

^  Archbishop  Manning  (III.  p.  118)  speaks  of  history  as  'a  wilderness  without  guide  or  path,' 
and  says :  '  Whensoever  any  doctrine  is  contained  in  the  divine  revelation  of  the  Church' 
[the  very  point  which  can  not  be  proved  in  the  case  before  us],  'all  difficulties  from  human 
history  are  excluded,  as  Tertullian  lays  down,  by  prescription.  The  only  source  of  revealed 
truth  is  God  ;  the  only  channel  of  his  revelation  is  the  Church.  No  human  history  can  de- 
clare what  is  contained  in  that  revelation.  The  Church  alone  can  determine  its  limits,  and 
therefore  its  contente.' 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCII*  91 

according  to  the  Roman  Catholic  theory,  Scripture  and  history  or  tra- 
dition are  the  two  indispensable  tests  of  the  truth  of  a  dogma.  It  has 
always  been  held  that  the  Pope  and  tlie  Bishops  are  not  the  creators 
and  judges,  but  the  trustees  and  witnesses  of  the  apostolic  deposit  of 
faith,  and  that  they  can  define  and  proclaim  no  dogma  which  is  not 
well  founded  in  primitive  tradition,  written  or  unwritten.  According 
to  the  famous  rule  of  Yincentius  Lirinensis,  a  dogma  must  have  three 
marks  of  catholicity:  the  catholicity  of  time  (semper),  of  space  {uhique)^ 
and  of  number  {ah  omnibus).  The  argument  from  tradition  is  abso- 
lutely essential  to  orthodoxy  in  the  Roman  sense,  and,  as  hitherto  held, 
more  essential  than  Scripture  proof.^  The  difference  between  Roman- 
ism and  Protestantism  on  this  point  is  this :  Romanism  requires  proof 
from  tradition  first,  from  Scripture  next,  and  makes  the  former  indis- 
pensable, the  latter  simply  desirable ;  while  Protestantism  reverses  the 
order,  and  with  its  theory  of  the  Bible  as  the  only  rule  of  faith  and 
practice,  and  as  an  inexhaustible  mine  of  truth  that  yields  precious  ore 
to  every  successive  generation  of  miners,  it  may  even  dispense  with 
traditional  testimony  altogether,  provided  that  a  doctrine  can  be  clearly 
derived  from  the  Word  of  God. 

Now  it  can  be  conclusively  proved  that  the  dogma  of  Papal  In- 
fallibility, like  the  dogma  of  the  Immaculate  Conception  of  Mary, 
lacks  every  one  of  the  three  marks  of  catholicity.  It  is  a  compara- 
tively modern  innovation.  It  was  not  dreamed  of  for  more  than  a 
thousand  years,  and  is  unknown  to  this  day  in  the  Greek  Church, 
the  oldest  in  the  world,  and  in  matters  of  antiquity  always  an  im- 
portant witness.  The  whole  history  of  Christianity  w^ould  have  talien 
a  different  course,  if  in  all  theological  controversies  an  infallible  tri- 
bunal in  Rome  could  have  been  invoked.^    Ancient  Creeds,  Councils, 


*  This  Archbishop  Kenrick,  in  his  Concio,  frankly  admits  :  ^Irenceij  TertuUiani^  Augustiniy 
Vincentii  Lirinensis  exempla  secutus,  Jidei  CatholiccB  probationes  ex  iraditione  potius  quant 
ex  Scripturarum  interpretatione  qucerendas  duxi;  quce  interpretation  juxta  Tertullianum  ma- 
gis  apta  est  ad  veritatem  ohumbitandum  quam  demonstrandum.^ 

'  '  Die  ganze  Geschichte  des  ersten  Jahrtausends  der  Kirche  ware  eine  andere  gewesen,  wenn 
in  dem  Bischofvon  Rom  das  Beumsstsein,  in  der  Kirche  auch  nur  eine  Ahnung  davon  geicesen 
ware,  dass  dort  ein  Quell  unfehlbarer  Wahrheit  fliesse.  Statt  all  der  bittern,  verstlirendcn 
Kdmpfe  gegen  wirkliche  oder  vermeintliche  Haretiker,  gegen  die  man  Bucher  schrieb  und  Si/- 
noden  aller  Art  versammelte,  wUrden  alle  Wohlmeinende  sich  au/den  un/ehlbaren  Sj)ruch  des 
Papstes  berufen  haben,  und  mehr  als  einst  das  Orakel  des  Apollo  zu  Delphi  wiirde  das  zu 
Born  befragt  warden  sein.    Dagegen  war  ei  injenen  Jahrhunderten^  als  alles  Christenthum  a.x{f 


92  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

Fathers,  and  Popes  can  be  summoned  as  witnesses  against  the  Vatican 
dogma. 

1.  The  four  cecuinenical  Creeds,  the  most  authoritative  expressions 
of  the  old  Catholic  faith  of  the  Eastern  and  Western  Churches,  contain 
an  article  on  the  'holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church,'  but  not  one 
word  about  the  Bishops  of  Korae,  or  any  other  local  Church.  How 
easy  and  natural,  yea,  in  view  of  the  fundamental  importance  of  the 
Infallibility  dogma,  how  necessary  would  have  been  the  insertion  of  Bo- 
ma/)i  after  the  other  predicates  of  the  Church,  or  the  addition  of  the 
article :  *  The  Pope  of  Rome,  the  successor  of  Peter  and  infallible  vicar 
of  Christ.'  If  it  had  been  believed  then  as  now,  it  would  certainly  ap- 
pear at  least  in  the  Eoman  form  of  the  Apostles'  Creed ;  but  this  is  as 
silent  on  this  point  as  the  Aquilejan,  the  African,  the  Galilean,  and 
other  forms. 

And  this  uniform  silence  of  all  the  oecumenical  Creeds  is  strength- 
ened by  the  numerous  local  Creeds  of  the  Nicene  r.ge,  and  by  the  vari- 
ous ante-Nicene  rules  of  faith  up  to  Tertullian  and  Irenaeus,  not  one  of 
which  contains  an  allusion  to  such  an  article  of  faith. 

2.  The  oecumenical  Councils  of  the  first  eight  centuries,  which  are 
recognized  by  the  Greek  and  Latin  Churches  alike,  are  equally  silent 
about,  and  positively  inconsistent  with.  Papal  Infallibility.  They  were 
called  by  Greek  Emperors,  not  by  Popes ;  they  were  predominantly, 
and  some  of  them  exclusively,  Oriental ;  they  issued  their  decrees  in 
their  own  name,  and  in  the  fullness  of  authority,  without  thinking  of 
submitting  them  to  the  approval  of  Rome ;  they  even  claimed  the  right 
of  judging  and  condemning  the  Roman  Pontiff,  as  well  as  any  other 
Bishop  or  Patriarch. 

In  the  first  Nicene  Council  there  was  but  one  representative  of  the 
Latin  Church  (Hosius  of  Spain) ;  and  in  the  second  and  the  fifth  oecu- 
menical Councils  there  was  none  at  all.  The  second  oecumenical  Coun- 
cil (381),  in  the  third  canon,  put  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople  on  a  par 
with  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  assigning  to  the  latter  only  a  primacy  of 
honor;  and  the  fourth  oecumenical  Council  (451)  confirmed  this  canon 
in  spite  of  the  energetic  protest  of  Pope  Leo  I. 

die  Spitze  eines  Dogmas  gestellt  wurde^  nichts  unerhl}rtes,'dass  auck  ein  Papst  vor  der  sub- 
tilen  Bestimmung  des  siegenden  Dogma  zum  Haretiker  wurde,'  Hase,  Polemik,  Buch  I. 
civ.  p.  161, 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  93 

But  more  than  this :  the  sixth  oecumenical  Council,  held  680,  pro- 
nounce^  the  anathema  on  Honorius,  '  the  former  Pope  of  old  Rome,' 
for  teaching  officially  the  Monothelite  heresy;  and  this  anathema  was 
signed  by  all  the  members  of  the  Council,  including  the  three  delegates 
of  the  Pope,  and  was  several  times  repeated  by  the  seventh  and  eighth 
Councils,  which  were  presided  over  by  Papal  delegates.  But  we  must 
return  to  this  famous  case  again  in  another  connection. 

3.  The  Fathers,  even  those  who  unconsciously  did  most  service  to 
Rome,  and  laid  the  foundation  for  its  colossal  pretensions,  yet  had  no 
idea  of  ascribing  absolute  supremacy  and  infallibility  to  the  Pope. 

Clement  of  Rome,  the  first  Roman  Bishop  of  whom  we  have  any 
authentic  account,  wrote  a  letter  to  the  Church  at  Corinth — not  in  his 
name,  but  in  the  name  of  the  Roman  Congregation ;  not  with  an  air 
of  superior  authority,  but  as  a  brother  to  brethren — barely  mentioning 
Peter,  but  eulogizing  Paul,  and  with  a  clear  consciousness  of  the  great 
difference  between  an  Apostle  and  a  Bishop  or  Elder. 

Ignatius  of  Antioch,  who  suffered  martyrdom  in  Rome  under  Tra- 
jan, highly  as  he  extols  Episcopacy  and  Church  unity  in  his  seven  Epis- 
tles, one  of  which  is  addressed  to  the  Roman  Christians,  makes  no  dis- 
tinction of  rank  among  Bishops,  but  treats  them  as  equals. 

Irenceus  of  Lyons,  the  champion  of  the  Catholic  faith  against  the 
Gnostic  heresy  at  the  close  of  the  second  century,  and  the  author  of 
the  famous  and  variously  understood  passage  about  the  potentior  pr in- 
cipalitas  {Trporda)  ecclesice  Itomance.,  sharply  reproved  Yictor  of  Rome 
when  he  ventured  to  excommunicate  the  Asiatic  Christians  for  their 
different  mode  of  celebrating  Easter,  and  told  him  that  it  was  contrary 
.to  Apostolic  doctrine  and  practice  to  judge  brethren  on  account  of  eat- 
ing and  drinking,  feasts  and  new  moons.  Cyprian,  likewise  a  saint  and 
a  mar4;yr,  in  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  in  his  zeal  for  visible  and 
tangible  unity  against  the  schismatics  of  his  diocese,  first  brought  out 
the  fertile  doctrine  of  the  Roman  See  as  the  chair  of  Peter  and  the 
centre  of  Catholic  unity ;  yet  with  all  his  Romanizing  tendency  he  was 
the  great  champion  of  the  Episcopal  solidarity  and  equality  system,  and 
always  addressed  the  Roman  Bishop  as  his  'brother'  and  'colleague;' 
he  even  stoutly  opposed  Pope  Stephen's  view  of  the  validity  of  heret- 
ical baptism,  charging  him  with  error,  obstinacy,  and  presumption. 
He  never  yielded,  and  the  African  Bishops,  at  the  third  Council  at 


94  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

Cartilage  (256),  empliatically  indorsed  liis  opposition.  Firmilian, 
Bishop  of  Caesarea,  and  Dionysius,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  likewise  bit 
terly  condemned  the  doctrine  and  conduct  of  Stephen,  and  told  him 
that  in  excommnnicating  others  he  only  excommunicated  himself. 

Augustine  is  often  quoted  by  Infallibilists  on  account  of  his  famous 
dictum,  Roma  lo&icta  est,  causa  finita  est}  But  he  simply  means  that, 
gince  the  Councils  of  Mileve  and  Carthage  had  spoken,  and  Pope  Inno- 
cent I.  had  acceded  to  their  decision,  the  Pelagian  controversy  was 
iinally  settled  (although  it  was,  after  all,  not  settled  till  after  his  death, 
at  the  Council  of  Ephesus).  Had  he  dreamed  of  the  abuse  made  of 
this  utterance,^  he  would  have  spoken  very  differently.  For  the  same 
Augustine  apologized  for  Cyprian's  opposition  to  Pope  Stephen  on  the 
ground  that  the  controversy  had  then  not  yet  been  decided  by  a  Coun- 
cil, and  maintained  the  view  of  the  liability  of  Councils  to  correction 
and  improvement  by  subsequent  Councils.  He  moreover  himself  op- 
posed Pope  Zosimus,  when,  deceived  by  Pelagius,  he  declared  him 
sound  in  the  faith,  although  Pope  Innocent  I.  had  previously  excom- 
municated him  as  a  dangerous  heretic.  And  so  determined  were  the 
Africans,  under  the  lead  of  Augustine  (417  and  418),  that  Zosimus 
finally  saw  proper  to  yield  and  to  condemn  Pelagianism  in  his  '  Epis- 
tola  Tractoria} 

Gregory  I.,  or  the  Great,  the  last  of  the  Latin  Fathers,  and  the 
first  of  the  mediseval  Popes  (590-604),  stoutly  protested  against  the 
assumption  of  the  title  cecumenical  or  universal  Bishop  on  the  part  of 
the  Patriarchs  of  Constantinople  and  Alexandria,  and  denounced  this 
whole  title  and  claim  as  hlasphemous,  anti- Christian,  and  devilish, 
since  Christ  alone  was  the  Head  and  Bishop  of  the  Church  universal, 
while  Peter,  Paul,  Andrew,  and  John,  were  members  under  the  same 
Head,  and  heads  only  of  single  portions  of  the  whole.  Gregory  would 
rather  call  himself  '  the  servant  of  the  servants  of  God,'  which,  in  the 
mouths  of  his  successors,  pretending  to  be  Bishops  of  bishops  and  Lords 
of  lords,  has  become  a  shameless  irony.^ 

'  Or  in  a  modified  form:  '  Causa  finita  est,  utinam  aliquando  finiatur  error!''  Serm.  131, 
c.  10.  See  Janus,  Rauscher,  von  Schulte  versus  Cardoni  and  Hergenrother,  quoted  by  From- 
mann,  p.  424. 

^  As  well  as  some  other  of  his  sententious  sayings.  His  explanation  of  coge  intrare  was 
made  to  justify  religious  persecutions,  from  which  his  heart  would  have  shrunk  in  horror. 

^  The  passages  of  Gregory  on  this  subject  are  well  known  to  every  scholar.     And  yet  the 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  95 

As  to  the  Greek  Fathers,  it  would  be  useless  to  quote  them,  for  the 
entire  Greek  Church  in  her  genuine  testimonies  has  never  accepted  the 
doctrine  of  Papal  supremacy,  much  less  of  Papal  Infallibility. 

4.  Heretical  Poj)es. — We  may  readily  admit  the  rock-like  stability 
of  the  Roman  Church  in  the  early  controversies  on  the  Trinity  and  the 
Divinity  of  Christ,  as  compared  with  the  motion  and  changeability  of  the 
Greek  churches  during  the  same  period,  when  the  East  was  the  chief 
theatre  of  dogmatic  controversy  and  progress.  Without  some  founda- 
tion in  history,  the  Vatican  dogma  could  not  well  have  arisen.  It  would 
be  impossible  to  raise  the  claim  of  infallibility  in  behalf  of  the  Patri- 
archs of  Jerusalem,  or  Antioch,  or  Alexandria,  or  Constantinople,  among 
whom  were  noted  Arians,  Nestorians,  Monopliysites,  Monothelites,  and 
other  heretics.  Yet  tliere  are  not  a  few  exceptions  to  the  rule ;  and  as 
many  Popes,  in  their  lives,  flatly  contradicted  their  title  of  holiness,  so 
many  departed,  in  their  views,  from  Catholic  truth.  That  the  Popes 
after  the  Reformation  condemned  and  cursed  Protestant  truths  well 
founded  in  the  Scriptures,  we  leave  here  out  of  sight,  and  confine  our 
reasoning  to  facts  within  the  limits  of  Roman  Catholic  orthodoxy. 

Tlie  canon  law  assumes  throughout  that  a  Pope  may  openly  teach 
heresy,  or  contumaciously  contradict  the  Catholic  doctrine ;  for  it  de- 
clares that,  while  he  stands  above  all  secular  tribunals,  yet  he  can  be 
judged  and  deposed  for  the  crime  of  heresy.^  This  assumption  was  so 
interwoven  in  the  faith  of  the  Middle  Ages  that  even  the  most  power- 
ful of  all  Popes,  Innocent  III.  (d.  1216),  gave  expression  to  it  when  he 
said  that,  though  he  w^as  only  responsible  to  God,  he  may  sin  against 
the  faith,  and  thus  become  subject  to  the  judgment  of  the  Church.'* 
Innocent  IV.  (d.l254)  speaks  of  heretical  commands  of  the  Pope,  which 
need  not  be  obeyed.  Wlien  Boniface  VIII.  (d.  1303)  declared  that 
every  creature  must  obey  tlie  Pope  at  the  loss  of  eternal  salvation,  he 
was  charged  with  having  a  devil,  because  he  presumed  to  be  infallible, 


Vatican  decree,  in  ch.  iii.,  by  omitting  the  principal  part,  makes  him  say  almost  the  very 
opposite. 

'  Decret.  Gratian.  Dist.  xl.  c.  C,  in  conformity  with  the  sentence  of  Hadrian  II.:  ^Cunctos 
ipsos  judicaturus  \_Papa'],  a  nemine  est  judicandus,  nisi  dkprehkndatcr  a  FIDE  devius.' 
k"'ee  on  this  point  especially  von  Schulte,  Concilien,  pp.  188  sqq. 

'  Se7'm.  II.  de  consecrat.  Pontificis :  ''In  tantum  mihi  Jides  necessaria  est,  cum  de  cateris 
peccatis  Deum  Judicem  haheam^  ut  propter  solum  peccatum  quod  injidem  committitur,  possim 
ab  Ecclesia  judicari.' 


96  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

which  wag  impossible  without  witchcraft.  Even  Hadrian  YI.,  in  the 
•  Tjixteenth  century,  expressed  the  view,  which  he  did  not  recant  as  Pope, 
that  '  if  by  the  Roman  Church  is  understood  its  head,  the  Pope,  it  is 
certain  tliat  he  can  err  even  in  matters  of  faith.' 

This  old  Catholic  theory  of  the  fallibility  of  the  Pope  is  abundantly 
borne  out  by  actual  facts,  wliicli  have  been  established  again  and  again 
by  Catholic  scholars  of  the  liighest  authority  for  learning  and  candor. 
We  need  no  better  proofs  than  those  furnished  by  them. 

Zephyrinus  (201-219)  and  Callistus  (219-223)  held  and  taught  (ac- 
cording to  the  'Philosophumena'  of  Hippolytus,  a  martyr  and  saint) 
tlie  Patripassian  heresy,  that  God  the  Father  became  incarnate  and 
suffered  with  the  Son. 

Pope  Liberius,  in  358,  subscribed  an  Arian  creed  for  the  purpose  of 
regaining  his  episcopate,  and  condemned  Athanasius,  Uhe  father  of  or- 
tliodoxy,'  who  mentions  tlie  fact  with  indignation. 

During  the  same  period,  his  rival,  Felix  IL,  was  a  decided  Arian  ;  but 
there  is  a  dispute  about  his  legitimacy;  some  regarding  him  as  an  anti- 
Pope,  althougli  he  has  a  place  in  the  Romish  Calendar  of  Saints,  and 
Gregory  XIII.  (1582)  confirmed  his  claim  to  sanctity,  against  which 
Baron ius  protested. 

In  the  Pelagian  controversy.  Pope  Zosimus  at  first  indorsed  the  or- 
thodoxy of  Pelagius  and  Celestins,  whom  his  predecessor,  Innocent  I., 
had  condemned ;  but  he  yielded  afterwards  to  the  firm  protest  of  St. 
Augustine  and  the  African  Bishops. 

In  the  Three-Chapter  controversy,  Pope  Vigilins  (538-555)  showed  a 
contemptible  vacillation  between  two  opinions:  first  indorsing;  then,  a 
year  afterwards,  condemning  (in  obedience  to  the  Emperor's  wishes)  the 
Three  Chapters  (i.  e.,  the  writings  of  Theodore,  Theodoret,  and  Ibas) ; 
then  refusing  the  condemnation ;  then,  tired  of  exile,  submitting  to  the 
fifth  oecumenical  Council  (553),  which  had  broken  off  communion  witli 
-liim  ;  and  confessing  that  he  had  unfortunately  been  the  tool  of  Satan, 
-  who  labors  for  the  destruction  of  the  Church.  A  long  schism  in  the 
West  was  the  consequence.  Pope  Pelagius  II.  (585)  significantly  ex- 
I   cused  this  weakness  by  the  inconsistency  of  St.  Peter  at  Antioch. 

John  XXII.  (d.  1334)  maintained,  in  opposition  to  Nicholas  III.  and 
Clement  Y.  (d.  1314),  that  the  Apostles  did  not  live  in  perfect  pov- 
erty, and  branded  the  opposite  doctrine  of  liis  predecessors  as  heretical 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  97 

and  dangerous.  He  also  held  an  opinion  concerning  the  middle  state 
of  the  righteous,  which  was  condemned  as  heresy  by  the  University  of 
Paris. 

Contradictory  opinions  were  taught  by  different  Popes  on  the  sacra- 
ments, on  the  immaculate  conception  of  the  Virgin  Mary  (see  p.  123), 
on  matrimony,  and  on  the  subjection  of  the  temporal  power  to  the 
Church.i 

But  the  most  notorious  case  of  an  undeniably  official  indorsement  of 
heresy  by  a  Pope  is  that  of  Honorius  I.  (625-638),  which  alone  is  suffi- 
cient to  disprove  Papal  Infallibility,  according  to  the  maxim:  Falsus 
in  uno^  falsus  in  omnibus}  This  case  has  been  sifted  to  the  very  bot- 
tom before  and  during  the  Council,  especially  by  Bishop  Hefele  and 
P^re  Gratry.  The  following  decisive  facts  are  established  by  the  best 
documentary  evidence : 

(1.)  Honorius  taught  ex  cathedra  (in  two  letters  to  his  heretical  col- 
league, Sergius,  Patriarch  of  Constantinople)  the  Monothelite  heresy, 
which  was  condemned  by  the  sixth  oecumenical  Council,  i.  e.,  the  doc- 
trine that  Christ  had  only  que  will,  and  not  two  (corresponding  to  his 
two  natures).^ 

(2.)  An  oecumenical  Council,  universally  acknowledged  in  the  East 
and  in  the  West,  held  in  Constantinople,  680,  condemned  and  excom- 

*  See  examples  under  this  head  in  Janus^  pp.  54  sqq.  {Irrthumer  und  Widerspriiche  der 
Papste),  p.  ~)  I  of  the  London  ed. 

"  Or,  as  Perrone,  himself  an  Infallibilist,  who  in  his  Dogmatic  Theology  characteristically 
treats  of  the  Pope  before  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  tradition,  puts  it :  '  Si  vel  unicus  ejvsmodi 
error  deprehenderetur,  appareret  omnei  adductas  prohationes  in  nihilum  redactum  iri.^ 

^  Honorius  prescribed  the  technical  temi  of  the  Monothelites  as  a  dogma  to  the  Church 
{dogma  ecclesiasticum).  In  a  reply  to  the  Monothelite  Patriarch  Sergius  of  Constantinople, 
which  is  still  extant  in  Greek  and  Latin  (Mansi,  Coll.  Condi.  Tom.  XI.  pp.  538  sqq.),  he  ap- 
proves of  his  heretical  view,  and  says  as  clearly  as  words  can  make  it :  '  Therefore  we  confess 
also  one  will  (iV  BiXij/xa)  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  since  the  Godhead  has  assumed  our  nature, 
but  not  our  guilt.'  In  a  second  letter  to  Sergius,  of  which  we  have  two  fragments  (Mansi, 
1.  c.  p.  579),  Honorius  rejects  the  orthodox  term  two  energies  (duo  tvfpyeiai,  duce  operationes), 
which  is  used  alongside  with  Iwo  wills  (Svo  SrsXijfiara,  voluntates).  Christ,  he  reasons,  as- 
sumed human  nature  as  it  was  before  the  fall,  when  it  had  not  a  law  in  the  members  which 
resists  the  law  of  the  Spirit.  He  knew  only  a  sinful  human  will.  The  Catholic  Church  re- 
jects Monothelitism,  or  the  doctrine  of  one  will  of  Christ,  as  involving  or  necessarily  leading 
to  Monophysitism,  i.  e, ,  the  doctrine  that  Christ  had  but  owe  nature ;  for  will  is  an  attribute 
of  nature,  not  of  the  person.  The  Godhead  has  three  persons,  but  only  one  nature,  and  only 
one  will.  Christ  has  two  wills,  because  he  has  two  natures.  The  compromise  formula  of  Em- 
peror Heraclius  and  Patriarch  Sergius  of  Constantinople  endeavored  to  reconcile  the  Mono- 
physites  with  the  orthodox  Church  by  teaching  that  Christ  had  two  natures,  but  only  one 
will  and  one  energy. 

G 


98  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL 

municated  Hoiiorius, '  the  former  Pope  of  Old  Rome,'  as  a  heretic,  who 
with  the  help  of  the  old  serpent  had  scattered  deadly  error.^  The  sev- 
enth oecumenical  Council  (787)  and  the  eighth  (869)  repeated  the  anath- 
ema of  the  sixth. 

(3.)  The  succeeding  Popes  down  to  the  eleventh  century,  in  a  solemn 
oath  at  their  accession,  indorsed  the  sixth  oecumenical  Council,  and  pro- 
nounced ^an  eternal  anathema'  on  the  authors  of  the  Monothelite  her- 
esy, together  with  Pope  Honorius,  because  he  had  given  aid  and  com- 
fort to  the  perverse  doctrines  of  the  heretics.'^  The  Popes  themselves, 
therefore,  for  more  than  three  centuries,  publicly  recognized,  first,  that 
an  oecumenical  Council  may  condemn  a  Pope  for  open  heresy,  and, 
secondly,  that  Pope  Honorius  was  justly  condemned  for  heresy.  Pope 
Leo  II.,  in  a  letter  to  the  Emperor,  strongly  confirmed  the  decree  of  the 
Council,  and  denounced  his  predecessor  Honorius  as  one  who  ^endeav- 
ored by  profane  treason  to  overthrow  the  immaculate  faith  of  the  Ro- 
man Church.'^  The  same  Pope  says,  in  a  letter  to  the  Spanish  Bishops : 
'  With  eternal  damnation  have  been  punished  Theodore,  Cyrus,  Ser- 
gius — together  with  Honorius^  who  did  not  extinguish  at  the  very  be- 
ginning the  flame  of  heretical  doctrine,  as  was  becoming  to  his  apostolic 
authority,  but  nursed  it  by  his  carelessness.'* 

This  case  of  Honorius  is  as  clear  and  strong  as  any  fact  in  Church 
history.^  Infallibilists  have  been  driven  to  desperate  efforts.  Some 
pronounce  the  acts  of  the  Council,  which  exist  in  Greek  and  Latin, 
downright  forgeries  (Baronius) ;  others,  admitting  the  acts,  declare  the 

'  Sessio  XVI. :  ''Sergio  hceretico  anathema^  Cijro*  hccretico  anathema^  Honorio  hceretico 
anathema.'  .  .  .  Sessio  XVIII. :  ''Honorius,  qui  fuit  Papa  antiquce  Homce  .  .  .  non  vaca- 
vit  .  .  .  Ecclesice  erroris  scandalum  suscitare  unius  voluntatis,  et  unius  operationis  in  duahus 
naturis  unius  Cliristi,'  etc.     See  Mansi,  Cone.  Tom.  XI.  pp.  622,  635,  655,  666. 

*  ' Quia pravis  hcereticorum  assert ionibus /omentum  impendit.'  This  Papal  oath  was  proba- 
bly prescribed  by  Gregory  II.  (at  the  beginning  of  the  eighth  century),  and  is  found  in  the 
Liber  Uiurnus  (the  book  of  formularies  of  the  Roman  chancery  from  the  fifth  to  the  eleventh 
century),  edited  by  Eugene  de  Roziere,  Paris,  1869,  No.  84.  .The  Liber  Pontijicalis  agrees 
with  the  Ziier  Diurnus.  Editions  of  the  Roman  Breviary  down  to  the  sixteenth  century  re- 
iterated the  charge  against  Honorius,  since  silently  dropped. 

^  ''Nee  non  et  Honorium  [anathemaf.izamus\  qui  hanc  apostolicam  ecclesiam  non  apostolicce 
traditionis  doctrina  lustravit,  sed  profana  proditione  immaculatam  fidem  subvertere  conatus 
est.'   Mansi,Tom.  XL  p.  731. 

*  'Cum  Honorio,  qui  flammam  hceretici  dogmatis,  non  ut  decuit  apostolicam  auctoritqtem, 
incipientem  extinxit,  sed  negligendo  con/ovit.'     Mansi,  p.  1052. 

*  Comp.  especially  the  tract  of  Bishop  Hefele,  above  quoted.  The  learned  author  of  the 
History  of  the  Councils  has  proved  the  case  as  conclusively  as  a  mathematical  demonstration. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  99 

letters  of  Honorins  forgeries,  so  that  he  was  unjustly  condemned  by  the 
Council  (Bellarmin) — both  without  a  shadow  of  proof;  still  others,  being 
forced  at  last  to  acknowledge  tlie  genuineness  of  the  letters  and  acts, 
distort  the  former  into  an  orthodox  sense  by  a  non-natural  exegesis,  and 
thus  unwillingly  fasten  upon  oecumenical  Councils  and  Popes  the  charge 
of  either  dogmatic  ignorance  and  stupidity,  or  malignant  representa- 
tion.^ Yet  in  every  case  the  decisive  fact  remains  that  both  Coimcils 
and  Popes  for  several  hundred  years  believed  in  the  fallibility  of  the 
Pope,  in  flat  contradiction  to  the  Vatican  Council.  Such  acts  of  vio- 
lence upon  history  .remind  one  of  King  James's  short  method  with 
Dissenters :  '  Only  hang  them,  that's  all.' 

5.  The  idea  of  Papal  absolutism  and  Infallibility,  like  that  of  the 
sinlessness  of  Mary,  can  be  traced  to  apocryphal  origin.  It  is  found 
first,  in  the  second  -century,  in  the  pseudo-Clementine  Homilies,  w^hich 
contain  a  singular  system  of  speculai;ive  Ebionism,  and  represent  James 
of  Jerusalem,  the  brother  of  the  Lord,  as  the  Bishop  of  Bishops,  the 
centre  of  Christendom,  and  the  general  Yicar  of  Christ ;  he  is  the  last 
arbiter,  from  whom  there  is  no  appeal ;  to  him  even  Peter  must  give 
an  account  of  his  labors,  and  to  him  the  sermons  of  Peter  were  sent 
for  safe  keeping.^ 

In  the  Catholic  Church  the  same  idea,  but  transferred  to  the  Bishop 
of  Rome,  is  first  clearly  expressed  in  the  pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals, 
that  huge  forgery  of  Papal  letters,  '\jrhich  appeared  in  the  middle  of  the 
ninth  century,  and  had  for  its,  object  the  completion  of  the  indepehd- 
ence  of  the  Episcopal  hierarchy  from  the  State,  and  the  absolute  power 
of  the  Popes,  as  the  legislators  and  judges  of  all  Christendom.  Here 
the  most  extravagant  claims  are  put  into  the  mouths  of  the  early  Popes, 
from  Clement  (91)  to  Damasus  (384),  in  the  barbarous  French  Latin  of 
the  Middle  Ages,  and  with  such  numerous  and  glaring  anachronisms  as 
to  force  the  conviction  of  fraud  even  upon-  Poman  Catholic  scholaiu 


'  So  Perrone,  in  his  Dogmatics,  and  Pennachi,  in  his  Liber  de  Honorii  I.  Rom.  Pont,  causa, 
1870,  which  is  effectually  disposed  of  by  Hefele  in  an  Appendix  to  the  German  edition  of  his 
tract.  Nevertheless,  Archbishop  Manning,  sublimely  ignoring  all  but  Infallibilist  authorities 
on  Honorius,  has  the  face  to  assert  (III.  p.  223)  that  the  case  of  Honorius  is  doubtful ;  that  he 
defined  no  doctrine  whatever ;  and  that  his  two  epistles  are  entirely  orthodox  !  Is  Manning 
more  infallible  than  the  infallible  Pope  Leo  11. ,  who  denounced  Honorius  ex  cathedra  as 
a  heretic? 

'  .'#3e  my  Church  History, Yo\.  I.  §  69,  p.  219,  and  the  tract  of  Lutterbeck  above  quoted. 


100  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

One  of  these  sayings  is :  '  The  Eoman  Church  remains  to  the  end  free 
from  stain  of  heresy.'  Soon  afterwards  arose,  in  the  same  hierarchical 
interest,  the  legend  of  the  donation  of  Constantine  and  his  baptism  by 
Pope  Silvester,  interpolations  of  the  writings  of  the  Fathers,  especially 
Cyprian  and  Augustine,  and  a  variety  of  fictions  embodied  in  the  Gesta 
Liberii  and  the  Liber  Poniijicalis,  and  sanctioned  by  Gratianus  (about 
1150)  in  his  DeGretum^  or  collection  of  canons,  which  (as  the  first  part 
of  the  Corpus  juris  canotiici)  became  the  code  of  laws  for  the  whole 
Western  Church,  and  exerted  an  extraordinary  influence.  By  this 
series  of  pious  frauds  the  mediaeval  Papacy,  which  was  the  growth  of 
ages,  was  represented  to  the  faith  of  the  Church  as  a  primitive  institu- 
tion of  Christ,  clothed  with  absolute  and  perpetual  authority. 

The  Popes  since  Nicholas  I.  (858-867),  who  exceeded  all  his  prede- 
cessors in  the  boldness  of  his  designs,  freely  used  what  the  spirit  of  a 
hierarchical,  superstitious,  and  uncritical  age  furnislied  them.  They 
quoted  the  fictitious  letters  of  their  predecessors  as  genuine,  the  Sardican 
canon  on  appeals  as  a  canon  of  Mcaea,  and  the  interpolated  sixth  canon 
of  Nicaea, '  the  Homan  Church  always  had  the  primacy,'  of  which  there 
is  not  a  syllable  in  the  original;  and  nobody  doubted  them.  Papal 
absolutism  was  in  full  vigor  from  Gregory  YII.  to  Boniface  YIII. 
Scholastic  divines,  even  Thomas  Aquinas,  deceived  by  these  literary 
forgeries,  began  to  defend  Papal  absolutism  over  the  whole  Church, 
and  the  Councils  of  Lyons  (1274)  a#id  of  Florence  (1439)  sanctioned  it, 
although  the  Greeks  soon  afterwards  rejected  the  false  union  based 
upon  such  assumption. 

But  absolute  power,  especially  of  a  spiritual  kind,  is  invariably  intox- 
icating and  demoralizing  to  any  mortal  man  who  possesses  it.  God 
Almighty  alone  can  bear  it,  and  even  he  allows  freedom  to  his  rational 
creatures.  The  reminiscence  of  the  monstrous  period  when  the  Papacy 
was  a  football  in  the  hands  of  bold  and  dissolute  women  (904-962),  or 
when  mere  boys,  like  Benedict  IX.  (1033),  polluted  the  Papal  crow^n 
with  the  filth  of  unnatural  vices,  could  not  be  quite  foi'gotten.  Tlic 
scandal  of  the  Papal  schism  (1378  to  1409),  when  two  and  even  three 
rival  Popes  excommunicated  and  cursed  each  other,  and  laid  all  West- 
ern Christendom  under  the  ban,  excited  the  moral  indignation  of  all 
good  men  in  Christendom,  and  called  forth,  in  the  beginning  of  the 
fifteenth  century,  the  three  Councils  of  Pisa,  Constance,  and  Basle, 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  101 

which  loudly  demanded  a  reformation  of  the  Church,  in  the  head  as 
well  as  in  the  members,  and  asserted  the  superiority  of  a  Council  over 
the  Pope. 

The  Council  of  Constance  (1414-1418),  the  most  numerous  ever  seen 
in  the  West,  deposed  two  Popes — John  XXIII.  (the  infamous  Baltliasai- 
Cossa,  who  had  been  recognized  by  the  majority  of  the  Church),  on  the 
charge  of  a  series  of  crimes  (May  29, 1415),  and  Benedict  XIII.,  as  a 
heretic  who  sinned  against  the  unity  of  the  Church  (July  26, 1417),^ 
and  elected  a  new  Pope,  Martin  Y.  (l!^ov.  11, 1517),  wlio  had  given  his 
adhesion  to  the  Council,  though  after  his  accession  to  power  he  found 
ways  and  means  to  defeat  its  real  object^,  i.  e.,  the  reformation  of  the 
Church. 

This  Council  was  a  complete  triumph  of  the  Episcopal  system,  and 
the  Papal  absolutists  and  Infallibilists  are  here  forced  to  the  logical  di- 
lemma of  either  admitting  the  validity  of  the  Council,  or  invalidating 
the  election  of  Martin  Y,  and  his  successors.  Either  course  is  fatal  to 
their  system.  Hence  there  has  never  been  an  authoritative  decision 
on  the  cecumenicity  of  this  Council,  and  the  only  subterfuge  is  to  say 
that  the  whole  case  is  an  extraordinary  exception ;  but  this,  after  all, 
involves  the  admission  that  there  is  a  higher  power  in  the  Church  over 
the  Papacy. 

The  Reformation  shook  the  whole  Papacy  to  its  foundation,  but 
could  not  overthrow  it.  A  powerful  reaction  followed,  headed  by  the 
Jesuits.  Their  General,  Lainez,  strongly  advocated  Papal  Infallibility 
in  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  declared  that  the  Church  could  not  err 
only  because  the  Pope  could  not  err.  But  the  Council  left  the  question 
undecided,  and  the  Eoman  Catechism  ascribes  infallibility  simply  to 
'the  Catholic  Church,'  without  defining  its  seat.  Bellarmin  advocated 
and  formularized  the  doctrine,  stating  it  as  an  almost  general  opinion 
that  the  Pope  could  not  publicly  teach  a  heretical  dogma,  and  as  a 
probable  and  pious  opinion  that  Providence  will  guard  him  even 
against  private  heresy.  Yet  the  same  Bellarmin  was  witness  to  the 
innumerable  blunders  of  the  edition  of  the  Latin  Ynlgate  prepared  by 
Sixtus  Y.,  corrected  by  his  own  hand,  and  issued  by  him  as  the  only  true 
and  authentic  text  of  the  sacred  Scriptures,  with  the  stereotyped  forms 


The  third  anti-Pope,  Gregory  XII.,  resigned. 


102  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

of  anatliema  upon  all  who  should  venture  to  change  a  single  word ; 
and  Bellarmin  himself  gave  the  advice  that  all  copies  should  be  called 
in,  and  a  new  edition  printed  with  a  lying  statement  in  the  preface 
making  the  printers  the  scape-goats  for  the  errors  of  the  Pope!  This 
whole  business  of  the  Yulgate  is  sufficient  to  explode  Papal  Infallibil- 
ity ;  for  it  touches  the  very  source  of  divine  revelation.  Other  Italian 
divines,  like  Alphonsus  Liguori,  and  Jesuitical  text-books,  unblushingly 
use  long-exploded  mediaeval  fictions  and  interpolations  as  a  groundwork 
of  Papal  absolutism  and  Infallibility. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  follow  the  progress  of  the  controversy  between 
the  Episcopal  and  the  Papal  systems  during  the  seventeenth  and 
eighteenth  centuries.  It  is  sufficient  to  say  that  the  greatest  Catholic 
divines  of  France  and  Germany,  including  Bossuet  and  Mcihler,  togeth- 
er with  many  from  other  countries,  down  to  the  88  protesting  Bishops 
in  the  Vatican  Council,  were  anti-Infallibilists ;  and  that  popular  Cate- 
chisms of  the  Koman  Church,  extensively  used  till  1870,  expressly  de- 
nied the  doctrine,  which  is  now  set  up  as  an  article  of  faith  necessary 
to  eternal  salvation.^ 

Pcipal  Infallihility  and  the  Bible. 

The  Old  Testament  gives  no  tangible  aid  to  the  Infallibilists.  The 
Jewish  Church  existed  as  a  divine  institution,  and  served  all  its  pur- 
poses, from  Abraham  to  John  the  Baptist,  without  an  infallible  tribu- 
nal in  Jerusalem,  save  the  written  law  and  testimony,  made  effective 
from  time  to  time  by  the  living  voice  of  inspired  prophecy.  Pious  Israel- 
ites found  in  the  Scriptures  the  way  of  life,  notwithstanding  the  con- 
tradictory interpretations  of  rabbinical  schools  and  carnal  perversions 
of  Messianic  prophecies,  fostered  by  a  corrupt  hierarchy.     The  Urim 

*  So  Overberg's  ^afecAismtts,  III.  Hauptstuck,  Fr.  349:  ^Miissen  loir  auck  glauben,  dass 
derPapst  unfehlhar  ist?  Neix,  dies  ist  kein  Glaubexsartikel.'  Keenan's  Controversial 
Catechism,  in  the  editions  before  1871,  declared  Papal  Inf.illibilitv  to  be  'a  Protestant  inr 
vention.'  The  Irish  Bishops — Doyle,  Murray,  Kelly— affirmed  under  oath,  before  a  Com- 
mittee of  the  English  Parliament  in  1825,  that  the  Papal  authority  is  limited  by  Councils, 
that  it  does  not  extend  to  civil  affairs  and  the  temporal  rights  of  princes,  and  that  Papal  de- 
crees are  not  binding  on  Catholics  without  the  consent  of  the  whole  Church,  either  dispersed 
or  assembled  in  Council.  See  the  original  in  the  Appendix  to  Archbishop  Kenrick's  Con- 
cio  in  Friedrich's  Documenta,  I.  pp.  228-242.  But  the  Irish  Catholics,  who  almost  believe 
in  the  infallibility  of  their  priests,  can  be  very  easily  taught  to  believe  in  the  infallibility  of  the 
Pope. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  103 

and  Thummim^  of  the  High-Priest  has  no  doubt  symbolical  reference 
to  some  kind  of  spiritual  illumination  or  oracular  consultation,  but  it 
is  of  too  uncertain  interpretation  to  furnish  an  argument. 

The  passages  of  the  New  Testament  which  are  used  by  Eoman  di- 
vines in  support  of  the  doctrine  of  Infallibility  may  be  divided  into 
two  classes :  those  which  seem  to  favor  the  Episcopal  or  Galilean,  and 
those  which  are  made  to  prove  the  Papal  or  Ultramontane  theory.  It 
is  characteristic  that  the  Papal  Infallibilists  carefully  avoid  the  former. 

1.  To  the  first  class  belong  John  xiv.  16  sq. ;  xvi.  13-16,  Avhere  Christ 
promises  the  Holy  Ghost  to  his  disciples  that  he  may  '  abide  with  them 
forever,'  teach  them  'all  things,'  bring  to  their  remembrance  all  he 
had  said  to  them,^  and  guide  them  '  into  the  wliole  truth ;'  ^  John  xx. 
21 :  'As  the  Father  hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you.  .  .  .  Receive  ye 
the  Holy  Ghost;'*  Matt,  xviii.  18:  'Whatever  ye  shall  bind  on  earth 
shall  be  bound  in  heaven,'  etc. ;  Matt,  xxviii.  19,  20 :  'Go  and  disciple 
all  nations  .  .  .  and  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto  the  end  of 
the  world.' 

These  passages,  which  are  addressed  to  all  Apostles  alike,  to  doubt- 
ing Thomas  as  well  as  to  Peter,  prove  indeed  the  unbroken  presence  of 
*  Christ  and  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  Church  to  the  end  of  time,  which  is  one 
of  the  most  precious  and  glorious  truths  admitted  by  every  true  Chris- 
tian. But,  in  the  first  place,  the  Church,  which  is  here  represented  by 
the  Apostles,  embraces  all  true  believers,  laymen  as  well  as  Bishops. 

t 

'  That  is,  on\o)fTiQ  Kal  d\f]'^sia,  doctrina  et  uerj^as,  Exod.  xxviii.  15-30  ;  Deiit,  xxxiii.  8,  9  ; 
1  Sam.  xxviii.  6.  The  Urim  and  Thummim  were  inscribed  on  the  garment  of  Aaron.  Some 
interpreters  identify  them  with  the  twelve  stones  on  which  the  names  of  the  ti'ibes  of  Israel 
were  engraved ;  others  regard  them  as  a  plate  of  gold  with  the  cacred  name  of  Jehovah ; 
still  others  as  polished  diamonds,  in  form  like  dice,  which,  being  thrown  on  the  table  or  Ark 
of  the  Covenant,  were  consulted  as  an  oracle.  See  the  able  article  of  Plumptre,  in  Smith's 
Bible  Dictionary, Vol.  IV.  pp.  335 S  sqq.  (Am.  ed.). 

^  The  TravTa  implies  a  strong  argument  for  the  completeness  of  Christ's  revelation  in  the 
New  Testament  against  the  Romish  doctrine  of  addition. 

^  The  phrase  e(q  Trjv  dXij^sLav  iraaav  (John  xvi.  13),  or,  according  to  another  reading,  Iv 
Ty  dXriSreigi  ttcwij  (test.  rec.  tiq  rrdaav  rrjv  dXq^tiav),  expresses  the  truth  as  taught  by  Christ 
in  its  completeness — the  whole  truth — and  proves  likewise  the  sufficiency  of  the  Scriptures. 
The  A.  V.  and  its  predecessors  ('  into  all  truth '),  also  Luther  (in  alle  Wahrheit,  instead  of 
die  ganze  or  voile  Wahrheit),  miss  the  true  sense  by  omitting  the  article,  and  conveying  the 
false  Idea  that  the  Holy  Ghost  would  impart  to  all  the  apostles  a  kind  of  omniscience.  Comp. 
my  annotations  to  Lange's  John  on  the  passages  (pp.  415,  478,  etc.). 

*  Literally :  '  Receive  Holy  Spirit' — \d(3tre  irvtv^a  uyiov.  The  absence  of  the  article  may 
indicate  a  partial  or  preparatory  inspiration  as  distinct  from  the  full  Pentecostal  effusion. 


104  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

Secondly,  the  promise  of  Christ's  presence  implies  no  infallibility,  for 
the  same  promise  is  given  even  to  the  smallest  number  of  true  believ- 
ers (Matt,  xviii.  20).  Thirdly,  if  the  passages  prove  infallibility  at  all, 
they  would  prove  individual  infallibility  by  continued  inspiration  rather 
than  corporate  infallibility  by  official  succession;  for  every  Apostle 
was  inspired,  and  so  far  infallible;  and  this  no  Roman  Catholic  Bishop, 
though  claiming  to  be  a  successor  of  the  Apostles,  pretends  to  be. 

2.  The  passages  quoted  by  the  advocates  of  the  Papal  theory  are 
three,  viz.,  Luke  xxii.  31 ;  Matt.  xvi.  18 ;  John  xxi.  15.^ 

We  admit,  at  the  outset,  that  these  passages  in  their  obvious  meaning, 
which  is  confirmed  by  the  history  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  assign  to 
Peter  a  certain  primacy  among  the  Apostles :  he  was  the  leader  and 
spokesman  of  them,  and  the  chief  agent  of  Christ  in  laying  the  foun- 
dations of  his  Church  among  the  Jews  and  the  Gentiles.  This  is  signifi- 
cantly prophesied  in  the  new  name  of  Peter  given  to  him.  The  his- 
tory of  Pentecost  (Acts  ii.)  and  the  conversion  of  Cornelius  (Acts  x.) 
are  the  fulfillment  of  this  prophecy,  and  furnish  the  key  to  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  passages  in  the  Gospels. 

This  is  the  truth  which  underlies  the  colossal  lie  of  the  Papacy.  For 
there  is  no  Romish  error  which  does  not  derive  its  life  and  force  from  * 
some  truth.2  But  beyond  this  w^e  have  no  right  to  go.  Tlie  position 
which  Peter  occupied  no  one  can  occupy  after  him.  The  foundation 
of  the  Church,  once  laid,  is  laid  for  all  time  to  come,  and  the  gates  of 
Hades  can  not  prevail  against  it.  The  New  Testament  is  its  own  best 
interpreter.  It  shows  no  single  example  of  an  exercise  of  jurisdiction 
of  Peter  over  the  other  Apostles,  but  the  very  reverse.  He  himself,  in 
his  Epistles,  disowns  and  prophetically  warns  his  fellow-presbyters 
against  the  hierarchical  spirit;  exhorting  them,  instead  of  being  lords 
over  God's  heritage,  to  be  ensamples  to  his  flock  (1  Pet.  v.  1-4).  Paul 
and  John  were  perfectly  independent  of  him,  as  the  Acts  and  Epistles 
prove.     Paul  even  openly  administered  to  him  a  rebuke  at  Antioch.^ 

*  Perrone  and  the  Vatican  decree  on  Infallibility  confine  themselves  to  these  passages. 

'Augustine  says  somewhere:  *■  Nulla  falsa  doctrina  est,  quce  non  aliquid  veri  permi- 
sceat,^ 

'  This  fact  is  so  obnoxious  to  Papists  that  some  of  them  doubt  or  deny  that  the  Cephas 
of  Galatians  ii.  11  was  the  Apostle  Peter,  although  the  New  'J'estament  knows  no  other.  So 
Perrone,  who  also  asserts,  from  his  own  preconceived  theory,  not  from  the  text,  that  Paul 
withstood  Peter  from  respectful  love  as  an  inferior  to  a  superior,  but  not  as  a  superior  to  an 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  105 

At  the  Council  of  Jerusalem  James  seems  to  have  presided,  at  all 
events  he  proposed  the  compromise  which  wsls  adopted  by  the  Apos- 
tleSj  Elders,  and  Brethren  ;  Peter  was  indeed  one  of  the  leading  speakers, 
but  he  significantly  advocated  the  truly  evangelical  principle  of  salva- 
tion by  faith  alone,  and  protested  against  human  bondage  (Acts  xv. ; 
comp.  Gal.  ii.). 

The  great  error  of  the  Papacy  is  that  -it  perverts  a  primacy  of  honor 
into  a  supremacy  of  jurisdiction,  a  personal  privilege  into  an  official 
prerogative,  and  a  priority  of  time  into  a  permanent  superiority  of 
rank.  And  to  make  the  above  passages  at  all  available  for  such  pur- 
pose, it  must  take  for  granted,  as  intervening  links  of  the  argument, 
that  which  can  not  be  proved  from  the  New  Testament  nor  from  his- 
tory, viz.,  that  Peter  was  Bishop  of  Rome ;  that  he  w^as  there  as  Paul's 
superior ;  that  he  appointed  a  successor,  and  transferred  to  him  his  pre- 
rogatives. 

As  to  the  passages  separately  considered,  Matt,  xvi.,  *  Thou  art  rock,' 
and  John  xxi.,  ^  Feed  my  flock,'  could  at  best  only  prove  Papal  abso- 
lutism, but  not  Papal  Infallibility,  of  which  they  do  not  treat.^  The 
former  teaches  the  indestructibility  of  the  Church  in  its  totality  (not  of 
any  individual  congregation),  but  this  is  a  different  idea.  The  Council 
of  Trent  lays  down  '  tlie  unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers'  as  the  norm 
and  rule  of  all  orthodox  interpretation,  as  if  exegetical  w^isdom  had 
begun  and  ended  with  the  divines  of  the  first  six  centuries.  But  of 
the  passage  Matt,  xvi.,  which  is  more  frequently  quoted  by  Popes  and 
Papists  than  any  other  passage  in  the  Bible,  there  are  no  less  than  five 
different  patristic  interpretations ;  the  rock  on  which  Christ  built  his 
Church  being  referred  to  Christ  by  sixteen  Fathers  (including  Augus- 
tine); to  the  faith  or  confession  of  Peter  by  forty-four  (including 
Chrysostom,  Ambrose,  Hilary,  Jerome,  and  Augustine  again) ;  to  Peter 
professing  the  faith  by  seventeen ;  to  all  the  Aj)ostles,  whom  Peter 
represented  by  his  primacy,  by  eight ;  to  all  the  faithful,  who,  believ- 
ing in  Christ  as  the  Son  of  God,  are  constituted  the  living  stones  of  the 

inferior !  Let  any  Bishop  try  the  same  experiment  against  the  Pope,  and  he  ^yill  soon  be 
sent  to  perdition. 

*  For  a  full  discussion  of  ITerjOoc  and  Trirpa,  see  my  edition  of  Lange's  Comm.  on  Matt.  xvi. 
18,  pp.  203  sqq. ;  and  on  the  Komish  perversion  of  the  (Soctksiv  and  Troifxaiveiv  rd  dpviof 
irpojiitTa  and  TrpofSdna  into  a  KUTaKvpimiv,  and  even  withdrawal  of  nourishment,  see  my  ed. 
of  Lange  on  John,  pp.  638  sqq. 


106  HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

Ghurch.i  But  not  one  of  the  Fathers  finds  Fapal  Infallibility  in  this 
passage,  nor  in  John  xxi.  The  ^unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers' 
is  a  pure  fiction,  except  in  the  most  general  and  fundamental  prin- 
ciples held  by  all  Christians;  and  not  to  interpret  the  Bible  except 
according  to  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers,  would  strictly 
mean  not  to  intei'pret  it  at  all.^ 

There  remains,  then,  only  the  passage  recorded  by  Luke  (xxii.  31, 32) 
as  at  all  bearing  on  the  disputed  question :  'Simon, Simon, behold, Satan 
desired  to  have  you  (or,  obtained  you  by  asking),  tliat  he  may  sift  you 
as  wheat ;  but  I  prayed  for  thee,  that  thy  faith  fail  not ;  and  thou,  when 
once  thou  art  converted  (or,  hast  turned  again),  strengthen  tliy  breth- 
ren/ But  even  this  does  not  prove  infallibility,  and  has  not  been  so 
understood  before  Popes  Leo  I.  and  Agatho.  For  (1)  the  passage  re- 
fers, as  the  context  shows,  to  the  peculiar  personal  history  of  Peter 
during  the  dark  hour  of  passion,  and  is  both  a  warning  and  a  comfort 
to  him.  So  it  is  explained  by  the  Fathers,  who  frequently  quote  it. 
(2)  Faith  here,  as  nearly  always  in  the  Kew  Testament,  means  personal 
trust  in,  and  attachment  to,  Christ,  and  not,  as  the  Romish  Church  mis- 
interprets it,  orthodoxy,  or  intellectual  assent  to  dogmas.  (3)  If  the  pas- 
sage refers  to  the  Popes  at  all,  it  would  prove  too  much  for  them,  viz., 
that  they,  like  Peter,  denied  the  Saviour,  were  converted  again,  and 
strengthened  their  brethren — which  may  be  true  enough  of  some,  but 
certainly  not  of  all.^ 

The  constant  appeal  of  the  Roman  Church  to  Peter  suggests  a  sig- 
nificant parallel.     There  is  a  spiritual  Peter  and  a  carnal  Simon,  wlio 

*  This  patristic  dissensus  was  brought  out  during  the  Council  in  the  Questio  distributed 
by  Bishop  Ketteler  with  all  the  proofs ;  see  Friedrich,  Docum.,  I.  pp.  6  sqq.  Kenrick  in  his 
gpeech  makes  use  of  it.    Comp.  also  my  annotations  to  Lange's  Comm.  on  Mattheiv  in  loco. 

'  Even  Kenrick  confesses  that  it  is  doubtful  whether  any  instance  of  that  unanimous  con^ 
sent  can  be  found  (in  his  Concio,  seeFriedr.  Docum..  I.  p.  195)  :  ^  Regula  interpetrandi  Scripturas 
nobis  imposita^  hcec  est:  eas  contra  unanimein  Patrum  consensum  non  interpetrari.  Si  un- 
qnam  detur  consensus  iste  unanimis  dubitari possit.  £o  tamen  dejiciente^  regida  ista  videtur 
7iobis  legem  iinponere  rnajorem,  qui  ad  unanimitatem  accedere  videretur,  patrum  numerum,  in 
suis  Scripturce  interpretationibus  sequendi/ 

'  This  logical  inference  is  also  noticed  by  Archbishop  Kenrick  (Concioj  in  Friedrich 's 
Docum.  I.  p.  200) :  '■Prceterea  singula  verba  in  ista  Christi  ad  Petrum  allocutione  de  Petri 
successoribus  intelligi  nequeunt,  quin  aliquid  maxime  absurdi  exinde  sequi  videretur.  "  Tu 
fiutem  conversus"  respiciunt  certe  conversionem  Petri.  Si  prior  a  verba  ;  ^^orari  pro  te"  et 
posteriora:  '■'' con firma  fr aires  tuos,'*  ad  successores  Petri  ccele'stem  vim,  et  munus  transiisse 
probent,  non  videtur  quarenam intermedia  verba:  ''''tu  autem  conversus,^^ ad  eos etiam pertinerey 
tt  aliquali  senau  de  eis  intelligi,  non  debeant. ' 


HISTORY  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL.  107 

are  separated,  indeed,  by  regeneration,  yet,  after  all,  not  so  completely 
that  the  old  nature  does  not  occasionally  re-appear  in  the  new  man. 

It  was  the  spiritual  Peter  who  forsook  all  to  follow  Christ ;  who  first 
confessed  him  as  the  Son  of  God,  and  hence  was  called  Eock ;  who  after 
his  terrible  fall  wept  bitterly;  was  re-instated  and  intrusted  with  the  care 
of  Christ's  sheep ;  who  on  the  birthday  of  the  Church  preached  the  first 
missionary  sermon,  and  gathered  in  the  three  thousand  converts ;  -who 
in  the  Apostles'  Council  protested  against  the  narrow  bigotry  of  the 
Judaizers,  and  stood  up  with  Paul  for  the  principle  of  salvation  by 
grace  alone  through  faith  in  Christ;  who,  in  his  Epistles,  warns  all 
ministers  against  hierarchical  pride,  and  exhibits  a  wonderful  meek- 
ness, gentleness,  and  humility  of  spirit,  showing  that  divine  grace  had 
overruled  and  sanctified  to  him  even  his  fall;  and  who  followed  at 
last  his  Master  to  the  cross  of  martyrdom. 

It  was  the  carnal  Simon  who  presumed  to  divert  his  Lord  from  the 
path  of  suffering,  and  drew  on  him  the  rebuke,  ^  Get  thee  behind  me, 
Satan ;  thou  art  a  stumbling-block  unto  me,  for  thou  mindest  not  the 
things  of  God,  but  the  things  of  men ;'  the  Simon,  who  in  mistaken  zeal 
used  the  sword  and  cut  off  the  ear  of  Malchus ;  who  proudly  boasted 
of  his  unswerving  fidelity  to  his  Master,  and  yet  a  few  hours  afterwards 
denied  him  thrice  before  a  servant- woman ;  who  even  after  the  Pente- 
costal illumination  was  overcome  by  his  natural  weakness,  and,  from 
policy  or  fear  of  the  Judaizing  party,  was  untrue  to  his  better  convic- 
tion, so  as  to  draw  on  him  the  public  rebuke  of  the  younger  Apostle 
of  the  Gentiles-  The  Romish  legend  of  Domine  quo  vadis  makes  him 
relapse  into  his  inconstancy  even  a  day  before  his  martyrdom,  and 
memorializes  it  in  a  chapel  outside  of  Rome. 

The  reader  may  judge  whether  the  history  of  the  Popes  reflects  more 
the  character  of  the  spiritual  Peter  or  the  carnal  Simon.  If  the  Apos- 
tolic Church  prophetically  anticipates  and  foreshadows  the  whole 
course  of  Christian  history,  the  temporary  collision  of  Peter,  the  Apos- 
tle of  the  circumcision,  and  Paul,  the  Apostle  of  the  uncircumcision, 
at  Antioch,  is  a  significant  type  of  the  antagonism  between  Romanism ' 
and  Protestantism,  between  the  Church  of  the  binding  law  and  the 
Church  of  the  free  gospel. 


\  K  «  A  ny* 
.I'/ER8ITT 


SYLLABUS  ERRORUM. 

[The  Papal  Syllabus  of  Eekoks.    A.D.  1864.] 


[This  document,  though  issued  by  the  sole  authority  of  Pope  Pius  IX.,  Dec.  8, 1864,  must  he  regarded 
now  as  infallible  and  iireformable,  even  without  the  formal  sanction  of  the  Vatican  Council.  It  is 
purely  negative,  but  indirectly  it  teaches  and  enjoins  the  very  opposite  of  what  it  condemns  as  error.] 

Syllabus  complectens  jprcecijouos  j  The  Syllabus  of  the  jprincipal  er- 
nostroB  cetatis  Errores  qui  notaii-  \  rors  of  our  time,  which  are  stig- 
tur  in  Allocutionibus  Consisto- 


rialibus,  in  Encyclicis,  aliisque 
Ajpostolicis  Letteris  Sanctissimi 
Domini  JVostri  Pii  PajxB  IX. 

§  I. — PANTHEISMUS,    NATUEALISMUS 
ET   EATIONALISMUS  ABSOLUTUS. 

1.  Nullum  su^remum,  sajpien- 
tissimum,  jprovidentissimwnque 
Numen  divinum  exsistit  ab  hac 
reriim  universitate  distinctum, 
et  Dens  idem  est  ac  rerum  na- 
tura  et  iccirco  immutationibus 
obnoxius,  Deusque  reajpse  fit  in 
homine  et  mundo,  atque  omnia 
Deus  stent  et  ijpsissimam  Dei 
habent  substantiam ;  ac  %ina  ea- 
dentque  res  est  Deus  ciwi  mun- 
do,  et  jproinde  sjpiritus  own  ma- 
teria, necessitas  cum  libertate, 
'veruni  cum  falso,  bonum  cum 
malo,  et  justum  cum  injusto. 

Alloc.  Maxima  qnidem  9  junii  18G2.  | 

2.  Necjanda  est  oinnis  Dei  ac-\ 
tio  in  homines  et  mundicm. 

Alloc.  Maxima  quidern  9  junii  1862. 

3.  Humana  ratio,  nidlo  jpror 


matized  in  the  Consistorial  Al- 
locutions, Encyclicals,  and  other 
Apostolical  Letters  of  our  Most 
Holy  Father,  Pojpe  Pius  IX. 

§  I. — PANTHEISM,   NATURALISM,  AND 
ABSOLUTE   RATIONALISM. 

1.  There  exists  no  supreme,  most 
wise,  and  most  provident  divine 
being  distinct  from  the  universe, 
and  God  is  none  otlier  than  na- 
ture, and  is  therefore  subject  to 
change.  In  effect,  God  is  pro- 
duced in  man  and  in  the  world, 
and  all  things  are  God,  and  have 
the  very  substance  of  God.  God 
is  therefore  one  and  the  same  thing 
with  the  world,  and  thence  spirit 
is  the  same  thing  with  matter,  ne- 
cessity with  liberty,  true  with  false, 
good  with  evil,  justice  with  injus- 
tice. 

Allocution  Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1 862. 

2.  All  action  of  God  upon  man 
and  the  world  is  to  be  denied. 

Allocution  Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1 802. 

3.  Human  reason,  without  any 


110 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OfI  ERRORS. 


sus  Dei  resjpectu  hahito,  unicus 
est  veri  et  falsi,  boni  et  mail 
arbiter,  sibi  ipsi  est  lex  et  natii- 
ralibus  stiis  virihus  ad  hominum 
ae  j?qpulorum  bonum  curanditm 
s^ifficit. 

Alloc.  Maxima  quidem  9  junii  1862. 

4.  Omnes  religionis  veritates 
ex  nativa  humance  rationis  vi 
derivant;  hinc  ratio  est  prin- 
cess norma,  qua  homo  cognotio- 
nem  omnium  cujuscumque  ge- 
neris veritatum  asseqtd  jpossit 
ac  debeat. 

Epist.  encycl.  Qui  pluribus  9  novembris 
1846. 

Epist.  encjcl.  Singulari  quidem  17  martii 
1856. 

Alloc.  Maxima  quidem  9  junii  1862. 

6.  Divina  revelatio  est  imper- 
fecta et  iccirco  subjecta  conti- 
nuo  et  indefinito  progressui,  qui 
humanoB  rationis  jprogressioni  re- 
spondeat. 

Epist.  encycl.  Qui  pluribus  9  novembris 
18^6. 

Alloc.  Maxima  quidem  9  junii  1862. 

6.  Christi  fides  humaiioi  refra- 
gatur  rationi;  divinaque  reve- 
latio non  solum,  nihil  prodest, 
verum  etiam ,  nocet  hominis  per- 
fectioni. 

Epist.  encycl.  Qui  pluribus  9  novembris 
1846. 

Alloc.  Maxima  quidem  9  junii  1862. 

7.  Provhetice  et   miracula  iii 


regard  ti  God,  is  the  sole  arbiter  of 
truth  arid  falsehood,  of  good  and 
evil ;  it  is  its  own  law  to  itself,  and 
suffices  by  its  natural  force  to  se- 
cure the  welfare  of  men  and  of 
nations. 

Allocution  Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1 862. 

4.  All  the  truths  of  religion  are 
derived  from  the  native  strengtli 
of  human  reason;  whence  reason 
is  the  master  rule  by  which  man 
can  and  ought  to  arrive  at  the 
knowledge  of  all  truths  of  every 
kind. 

Encyclical  Letters,  Qui  pluribus,  9th  No- 
vember, 1846. 

Encyclical  Letters,  Singulari  quidem,  17ih 
March,  1856. 

Allocution  Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862. 

5.  Divine  revelation  is  imperfect, 
and,  therefore,  subject  to  a  contin- 
ual and  indefinite  pi'ogress,  which 
corresponds  with  the  progress  of 
human  reason. 

Encyclical  Letters,  Qui  pluribus,  9th  No- 
vember, 1846. 

Allocution  Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862. 

6.  Christian  faith  contradicts 
human  reason,  and  divine  revela- 
tion not  only  does  not  benefit,  but 
even  injures  the  perfection  of 
man. 

Encyclical  Letters,  Qui  pluribus,  9th  No- 
vember, 1846. 

Allocution  ilfaxtTTja  quidem.,  9th  June,  1862. 

7.  The  prophecies  and  miracles 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


Ill 


Sacris  Litteris  exjoosita  et  narra- 
ta  sunt  jpoetarum  commenta,  et 
Christiance  fidei  mysteria  jphilo- 
sojpMcariiin  investigatioymin  sum- 
ma  ;  et  utriusque  Testamenti 
lihris  mythica  continentur  in- 
venta ;  ipseque  Jesus  Christus 
est  mytliica  fictio. 

Epist.  encycl.  Ciid  pluribus  9  novembris 
1846. 

Alloc.  Maxima  quidevi  9  junii  1862. 

II. — EATIONALISMUS   MODEEATUS. 

8.  Quum  ratio  humana  ipsi 
religioni  cequijparetur,  iccirco  the- 
ological disci/plince  ^erinde  ac  phi- 
losophiae  tractaiidoe  sunt. 

Alloc.  Singulari  quadam  perfusi  9  de- 
cembris  1854. 

9.  Omnia  indiscriminatim  do- 
gmata religionis  Christiance  stmt 
objectwm  naturalis  scientioe  seu 
jphilosojphi(E ;  et  humana  ratio 
historice  tantum  exculta  potest 
ex  suis  naturalibus  viinbus  et 
principiis  ad  veram  de  omnibus 
etiam  reconditioribus  dogmatibus 
scientiam  pervenir^e,  modo  ha^c 
dogmata  ipsi  rationi  tamquam 
objeotum  proposita  fiierint. 

Epist.  ad  Archiep.  I  rising.  Gravissimas 
11  decembris  1862. 

Epist.  ad  eumdem  Tuas  libenter  21  de- 
cembris 1863. 

10.  Quum  aliud  sit  philoso- 
phus,  aliud  philosophia,  ille  jus 


set  forth  and  narrated  in  the  Sa- 
cred Scriptures  are  the  fictions  of  po- 
ets ;  and  the  mysteries  of  the  Chris- 
tian faith  are  the  result  of  philo- 
sophical investigations.  In  the  books 
of  both  Testaments  there  are  contain- 
ed mythical  inventions,  and  Jesus 
Christ  is  him.self  a  mythical  fiction. 

Encyclical  Letters,  Qui  pluribus,  9th  No- 
vember, 1846. 

Allocution  Jiaxma  quldcm,  9th  June,  1862. 

§  II. — MODERN  KATIONALISM. 

8.  As  human  reason  is  placed  on 
a  level  with  religion,  so  theological 
matters  must  be  treated  in  the  same 
manner  as  philosophical  ones. 

Allocution  Singulari  quadam  perfusi,  9th 
December,  1854. 

9.  All  the  dogmas  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion  are,  without  excep- 
tion, the  object  of  scientific  knowl- 
edge or  philosophy,  and  human 
reason,  instructed  solely  by  his- 
tory, is  able,  by  its  own  natural 
strength  and  principles,  to  arrive 
at  the  true  knowledge  of  even 
the  most  abstruse  dogmas:  pro- 
vided such  dogmas  be  proposed  as 
subject-matter  for  human  reason. 

Letter  ad  Archiep.  Frising.  Gravissimas, 
11th  December,  1862. 

To  the  same,  Tuas  libenter,  21st  Deceja- 
ber,  1863. 

10.  As  the  philosopher  is  one 
thing,  and  philosopiiy  is  another,  so 


112 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


et  officiuin  liabet  se  suhmittendi 
auctoritatij  quarn  veram  ijpse 
jprohaverit ;  at  jphilosojpliia  ne- 
que  jpotest^  neque  debet  ulli  sese 
siibmittere  auctoritati. 

Epist.  ad  Archiep.  Erising.  Gravissimas 
H  decembvis  1862. 

Epist.  ad  eumdem  Tuas  libenter  21  de- 
cembris  1803. 

11.  Ecclesia  non  solum  7ion 
debet  in  2^J^'^^oso2)hiam  unqimm 
animadvertere,  veruin  etiam  de- 
bet ipsius  philosophicB  tolerare 
errores,  eique  relinquere  ut  ipsa 
se  corrigat. 

Epist.  ad  Archiep.  Erising.  Gravissimas 
11  decembris  1862. 

12.  ApostoliecB  Sedis,  Bomana- 
rumqxie  Congregatiomim  deer  eta 
liber um  scientice  progressum  im- 
pediunt. 

Epist.  ad  Archiep.  Erising.  Tuas  libenter 
«l  decembris  1863. 

13.  Methodus  etprincipia,  quibus 
antiqui  Doctores  scholastici  Theo- 
logiam  excoluerunt,  temporitm  nos- 
troriim  necessitatibus  scientiaru7)i- 
que  progressui  minim  e  congriiunt. 

Epist.  ad  Archiep.  Erising.  Tuas  libenter 
21  decembris  1863. 

14.  PhllosopJiia  tractanda  est^ 
nulla  supernaturalis  revelationis 
habita  ratione, 

Epist.  ad  Archiep.  Erising.  7 was  libenter 
21  decembris  1863. 

N.B. —Cwm  rationalismi  systemate  cohoe- 


it  is  the  right  and  duty  of  the  philos- 
opher to  submit  to  the  authority 
which  lie  shall  have  recognized  as 
true ;  but  philosophy  neither  can  nor 
ought  to  submit  to  any  authority. 

Letter  ad  Archiep.  Prising.  Gravissimas, 
11th  December,  1802. 

To  the  same,  Tuas  libenter,  21st  Decem- 
ber, 1863. 

11.  The  Church  not  only  ought 
never  to  animadvert  upon  philoso- 
phy, but  ought  to  tolerate  the  er- 
rors of  philosophy,  leaving  to  phi- 
losophy the  care  of  their  correc- 
tion. 

'  T>etter  ad  Archiep.  Frisiiig.    Gravissimas, 
11th  December,  1862. 

12.  The  decrees  of  the  Apostolic 
See  and  of  the  Roman  Congrega- 
tions fetter  the  free  progress  of 
science. 

Letter  ad  Archiep.  Frising.  Tuas  libenter, 
21st  December,  1803. 

13.  The  method  raid  principles 
by  which  the  old  scliolastic  doctors 
cultivated  theology  are  no  longer 
suitable  to  the  demands  of  the  age 
and  tlie  progress  of  science. 

Letter  rtc?^lrc//te/).  Frising.  Tuas  libenter, 
21st  December,  180g. 

14.  Philosophy  must  be  treated 
of  without  any  account  being  taken 
of  supernatural  revelation. 

Epist.  ad  Archie}).  Frising.  Tuas  libenter, 
21st  December,  1863. 

N.  B. — To  the  rationalistic  system  belong, 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


113 


rent  maximam  partem  errores  Antonii  Gun- 
ther,  qui  damnantur  in  Epist.  ad  Card.  Ar- 
chiep.  Coloniensem  Eximiam  tuam  15  junii 
1857,  et  in  Epist.  ad  Episc.  Wratislaviensem 
Dolore  baud  mediocri  30  aprilis  1860. 

§111. INDIFFERENTISMUS,    LATITTT- 

DINAIJISMUS. 

15.  Liber wn  cuique  homini  est 
eavi  arrvplecti  ac  jprojiteri  reli- 
gionem,  qxiam  rationis  lumine 
quis  ductus  veram  putaverit. 

Litt.  Apost.  Multiplices  inter  10  junii 
1851. 

Alloc,  Maxima  quidem  9  junii  1862. 

16.  Homines  in  cujxisvis  religio- 
nis  cultu  viam  ceternce  salutis  re- 
perire  oeternamqiie  salutem  asse- 
qui  jpossunt. 

Epist.  encycl.  dui  plurihus  9  novembris 
1846. 

Alloc.  XJhi  primum  17  decembris  1847. 

Epist.  encycl.  Singulari  quidem  17  martii 
1856. 

17.  Saltern  bene  speranditm  est 
de  oeterna  illoruin  omnium  salute^ 
qui  in  vera  Christi  Ecclesia  ne- 
quaquam  versantur. 

Alloc.  Singulari  quadam  9  decembris 
1854. 

Epist.  encycl.  Qmnto  conjiciamur  17  au- 
gustii  1863. 

18.  Protestantismus  non  aliud 
est  quam  diversa  verce,  ejusdem 
Christianoe  religionis  forma,  in 
qua    ceque    ao    in   Ecclesia    Ca- 


in  great  part,  the  errors  of  Anthony  GUnther, 
condemned  in  the  letter  to  the  Cardinal  Arch- 
bishop of  Cologne,  Eximiam  tuam,  June  15, 
1857,  and  in  that  to  the  Bishop  of  Breslau, 
Dolore  haud  mediocri,  April  30, 1860. 

§    III. — INDIFFEEENTISM,     LATTTUDI- 
NAEIANISM. 

15.  Every  man  is  free  to  em-    »> 
brace  and  profess  the  religion  he    ' 
shall  believe  true,  guided  by  the 
light  of  reason. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Multiplices  inter,  10th 
June,  1851. 

Allocution  ilifaarma  quidem,  9th  June,  1862. 

16.  Men   may*in   any  religion  .v 
find    the   way   of    eternal   salva-  • 
tion,  and    obtain    eternal    salva- 
tion. 

Encyclical  Letters,  Qui  pluribus,  9th  No- 
vember, 1846. 

Allocution  Ubi  primum,  17th  December, 
1847. 

Encyclical  Letters,  Singulari  quidem,  17th 
March,  1856. 

17.  We  may  entertain  at  least  a 
well-founded  hope  for  the  eternal      i 
salvation  of  all  those  who  are  in     } 
no  manner  in  the  true  Church  of 
Christ.    ■ 

Allocution  Singulari  quadam,  9th  Decem- 
ber, 1854. 

Encyclical  Letters,  Quanto  conjiciamur, 
17th  August,  1863. 

18.  Protestantism     is    nothing 
more   than   another  form'  of  the    AM 
same    true   Christian    religion,  in    j  ' 
which  it  is  possible  to  be  equally 


114 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


tholica      Deo     jplacere      datum 
est. 

Epist.  encycl.  Noscifis  et  Nobiscum  8  de- 
cembris  1849. 

§  IV. —  SOCIALISMUS,  COMMUNISMIJS, 
SOCIETATES  CLANDESTINE,  SOCIE- 
TATES  BIBLICE,  BOCIETATES  CLE- 
KICO-LIBEEALES. 

Ejusmodi  jpestes  scBjpe  gravis- 
simisque  verhorum  foninxdis  re- 
^rohantur  in  Ejpist.  encycl.  Qui 
pluribns  9  novemhr.  1846 ;  in  Al- 
loc. Quibns  quantisqne  20  a^ril. 
1849 ;  in  Epist.  encycl.  Noscitis  et 
Nobiscum  8  dec.  1849;  in  Alloc. 
Singulari  quadam  9  dec.  1854 ;  in 
Epist.  encycl.  Quauto  conficiamiir 
moerore  10  augusti  1863. 

§  Y.  —  ERROKES  DE   ECCLESIA   EJU.S- 
QUE  JURIBXJS. 

19.  Ecclesia  non  est  vera  jper- 
fectaque  societas  plane  libera, 
nee  jpollet  suis  jpropriis  et  con- 
stantihus  jurihus  sihi  a  divino 
suo  fundatore  collatis,  sed  civi- 
lis  jpotestatis  est  definlre  qucB 
sint  EcclesicB  jura  ac  Ihnites, 
intra  quos  eadem  jura  exercere 
queat. 

Alloc.  Singulari  quadam  9  decembris 
1854. 

Alloc.  Multis  gravihusque  17  decembris 
1860. 

Alloc.  Maxima  quidem  9  junii  1862. 

20.  Ecclesiastica  jpotestas  suam 


pleasing  to  God  as  in  the  Catholic 
Church. 

Encyclical  Letters,  Noscitis  et  Nobiscum, 
8th  December,  1849. 

§  IV.  —  SOCIALISM,  COMMUNISM,  SE- 
CRET SOCIETIES,  BIBLICAL  SOCIE- 
TIES, CLERICO-LIBERAL  SOCIE- 
TIES. 

Pests  of  this  description  are  fre- 
quently rebuked  in  the  severest 
terms  in  the  Encjc.  Qtci  pluri- 
bus,  Nov.  9,  1846;  Alloc.  Quibus 
quantisqne,  April  20,  1849;  En- 
cyc.  IToscitis  et  Nobiscxim,  Dec. 
8,  1849;  Alloc.  Singulari  qua- 
dam, Dec.  9, 1854;  Encyc.  Quan- 
to  conficiamur  inoerore,  Aug.  10, 
1863. 

§  (Y:^^  ERRORS    CONCERNING    THE 
CHURCH   AND   HER  EIGHTS. 

19l  The  Church  is  not  a  true,  and 
perfect,  and  entirely  free  society, 
nor  does  she  enjoy  peculiar  and  per- 
petual rights  conferred  upon  her  by 
her  Divine  Founder,  but  it  apper- 
tains to  the  civil  power  to  define 
what  are  the  rights  and  limits  with 
which  the  tDliurch  may  exercise  au- 
thority. 

Allocution  Siiigidari  quadam,  9th  Decem- 
ber, 1854. 

Allocution  Multis  gravibusque,  17th  De- 
cember, 18G0. 

Allocution  Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862. 

20.  The  ecclesiastical  power  must 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


115 


auctGritaiem  exercere  non  debet 
absqiLe  civilis  gubernii  venia  et 
assensu. 

Alloc.  Meminit  unusquisque  30  septembris 
1861. 

21.  Ecclesia  non  hahet  potesta- 
tem  dogmatice  definiendi^  religio- 
nem  Caiholicm  EcclesicB  esse  unice 
veram  religionem. 

Litt.  Apost.  MultipUces  inter  10  junii 
1851. 

22.  Ohligatio,  qua  Catholici 
magistri  et  scrijptores  omnino  ad- 
stringuntur^  coarctatur  in  iistan- 
tum,  qiice  ah  infallihili  EcclesicG 
judicio  veluti  fidei  dogmata  ah 
omnibus  credenda  projponuntur. 

Epist.  ad  Archiep.  Frising.  Tuas  lihenter 
21  decembris  1863. 

23.  Bomani  Pontifices  et  Con- 
cilia cecicmenica  a  limitihus  suce 
jpotestatis  recesserunt^  jura  prin- 
eipum  usiirparimt^  atgue  etiam 
in  rebus  fidei  et  morum  definien- 
dis  errarunt. 

Litt.  Apost.  MultipUces  inter  10  junii 
1851. 

24.  Ecclesia  vis  inferendoe  pote- 
statem.  non  habet,  negue  potesta- 
tern  nllam  temporalem  directam 
vel  indirectam, 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostolicce  22  augusti 
1851. 

25.  ProBter  potestatem  Episco- 
patui  inhcerentem',  alia  est  at- 
tributa  temporalis  potestas  a  ci- 


not  exercise  its  authority  without 
the  permission  and  assent  of  the 
civil  government. 

Allocution  Meminit  unusquisque^  30th  Sep- 
tember, 1861. 

21.  The  Church  has  not  the 
power  of  defining  dogmatically 
that  the  religion  of  the  Catholic 
Church  is  the  only  true  religion. 

Apostolic  Letter,  MultipUces  inter,  lOth 
June,  1851. 

,  22.,The  obligation  which  binds 
Catholic  teachers  and  authors  ap- 
plies only  to  those  things  which  are 
proposed  for  universal  belief  as 
dogmas  of  the  faith,  by  the  infal- 
lible judgment  of  the  Church. 

Ijetter  ad  Archiep.  Frising. ,  Tuas  libsnter, 
21st  December,  1863. 

23.  The  Koman  Pontiffs  and 
oecumenical  Councils  have  exceed- 
ed the  limits  of  their  power,  have 
usurped  the  rights  of  princes,  and 
have  even  committed  errors  in  de- 
fining matters  of  faith  and  morals. 

Apostolic  Letter,  MultipUces  inter,  10th 
June,  1851. 

(24.) The  Church  has  not  the 
power  of  availing  herself  of  force, 
or  any  direct  or  indirect  temporal 
power. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostolicce,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

25.  In  addition  to  the  authority 
inherent  in  the  Episcopate,  a  fiir- 
tlier  and  temporal  power  is  granted 


116 


THE  PA]?AL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


vili  imjperio  vel  expresse  vel  ta- 
cite  concessa,  revocanda  projpte- 
rea,  cum  libiierit,  a  civili  im- 
^erio. 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostolicoe.  22  augusti 
1851. 

26.  Ecclesia  non  habet  nativum 
ac  legitimum  jus  acquirendi  ac 
jpossidendi. 

Alloc.  Nunquamfore  15  decembns  1856. 
Epist.  encycl.   Incredihili  17    septembris 
1863. 

27.  Sacri  Ecclesice  ministri  Bo 
mamtsque  Pontifex  ah  omni  re- 
rum  tenvporalium  cura  ac  domi- 
nio  sunt  omnino  excludendi. 

Alloc.  Maxima  quidem  9  junii  1862. 

28.  EjpisGOjpis,  sine  gubernii 
venia,  fas  non  est  vel  ipsas 
apostolicas  litteras  jpromul- 
gare. 

Alloc.  Nunquam  fore  15  decembris  1856. 

29.  Gratice  a  Bomano  Ponti- 
fice  concessx  existimari  debent 
tamquam  irritce,  nisi  jper  guber- 
n iuni  fuerint  imjploratcB. 

Alloc.  Nunquamfore  15  decembris  1856. 

30.  Ecclesioe  et  personarum  ec- 
clesiasticarum  immunitas  a  jure 
civili  ortum  hdbuit. 

Litt.  Apost.  Muhiplices  inter  10  junii 
1851. 

31.  EccUsiasticura  forum  pro 
temjporalibus  clericorum  causis 
sive  civilibus  sive  criminalibus 
omnino  de  medio  tollendum  est, 


to  it  by  the  civil  authority,  either 
expressly  or  tacitly,  which  power  is 
on  that  account  also  revocablehy  the 
civil  authority  whenever  it  jDleases. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostolicoe,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

26.  The  Church  has  not  the  in- 
nate and  legitimate  right  of  acquis 
sition  and  possession. 

Allocution  Nunquamfore,  loth  Dec,  1856. 
Encyclical  Letters,  Incredihili,  17th  Sep- 
tember, 1863. 

27.  The  ministers  of  the  Church, 
and  the  Eoman  Pontiff,  ought  to  be 
absolutely  excluded  from  all  charge 
and  dominion  over  temporal  affaii:s. 

Allocution  Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862. 

28.  Bishops  have  not  the  right  of 
promulgating  even  their  apostolical 
letters,  without  the  permission  of 
the  government. 

Allocution  iVwBj«a»i /ore,  15th  Dec,  1856. 

29.  Dispensations  granted  by  the 
Roman  Pontiff  must  be  considered 
null,  unless  they  have  been  asked 
for  by  the  civil  government. 

Allocution  iVMwjMam/ore,  15th  Dec,  1856. 

30.  The  immunity  of  the  Churcli 
and  of  ecclesiastical  persons  derives 
its  origin  from  civil  law. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Multiplices  inter,  10th 
June,  1851. 

31.  Ecclesiastical  courts  for  tem- 
poral causes,  of  the  clergy,  whether 
civil  or  criminal,  ought  by  all  means 
to  be  abolished,  either  without  the 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


117 


etiam    inconsulta   et   reclamante 
ApostoUca  Sede. 

Alloc.  Acerhissimum  27  septembris 
1852. 

Alloc.  Nunquam  fore  15  decembris 
1856. 

32.  Absque  ulla  naturalis  juris 
et  cequitatis  violatione  jpotest  ah- 
rogari  jpersonalis  immunitas^  qua 
clerici  ah  onere  subeundce  exercen- 
dceque  militioe  eximuntur ;  hanc 
vero  dbrogationein  jpostulat  civilis 
jprogressus  maxime  in  societate 
ad  formam  liherioris  regiminis 
constituta. 

Epist.  ad  Epistc.  Montisregal.  Singularis 
Nohisque  29  septembris  1864. 

33.  I^on  jpei'tinet  wiice  ad  ec- 
clesiastical jurisdictionis  pote- 
statem  jprojprio  ac  nativo  jure 
dirigere  theologicarum  rerum 
doctrinam. 

Epist.  ad  Archiep.  Erising.  Tua&  Uhenter 
21  decembris  1863. 

34.  •  Doctrina  eom/parantium 
Itomanwn  Pontificem  jprincijpi 
lihero  et  agenti  in  universa  Ec- 
clesia  doctrina  est  quae,  medio  oevo 
jprcEvahiit. 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostolicce  22  augusti 
1851. 

35.  Nihil  vetat,  alicujus  con- 
cilii  generalis  sententia  aut  uni- 
versorum  jpojpulorum  facto,  sum- 
mum  Pontificatum  ah  Romano 
Episcojpo  atque   Urhe  ad   alium 


concurrence  and  against  the  pro- 
test of  the  Holy  See. 

Allocution  Acerhissimum,  27th  September, 
1852. 

Allocution  Nunquam  fore,  15tli  December, 
1856. 

32.  The  personal  immunity  exon- 
erating the  clergy  from  military 
service  may  be  abolished,  with- 
out violation  either  of  natural 
right  or  of  equity.  Its  abolition 
is  called  for  by  civil  progress, 
especially  in  a  community  consti- 
tuted upon  principles  of  liberal 
government. 

Letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Montreal,  Sin- 
gularis nohisque,  29th  September,  1864. 

33.  It  does  not  appertain  exclu- 
sively to  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction, 
by  any  right,  proper  and  inherent, 
to  direct  the  teaching  of  theological 
subjects. 

Letter  ad  A rch iep.  Frising.  Tuas  lihen ter, 
21st  December,  1863 

34.  The  teaching  of  those  wno 
compare  the  sovereign  Pontiff  to  a 
free  sovereign  acting  in  the  univer- 
sal Church  is  a  doctrine  which  pre- 
vailed in  the  middle  ages. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostolicce,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

35.  There  would  be  no  obstacle 
to  the  sentence  of  a  general  coun- 
cil, or  the  act  of  all  the  universal 
peoples,  transferring  the  pontifical 
sovereignty  from  the  Bishop  and 


JNTV 
118 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


Ejpiscopum    aliamque    civitatem, 
transferri. 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostolicce  22  augnsti 
1851. 

36.  Nationalia  consilii  defiiiitio 
nullam  aliam  admittit  disputa- 
tionem,  civilisque  administratio 
rem  ad  hosce  termmos  exigere 
jpotest. 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostoUccB  22  augusti 
1851. 

37.  Institui  possunt  nationales 
Ecclesice  ab  auctoritate  Roma- 
ni  Pontificis  subductoe.  jplaneque 

divisor. 

Alloc.  Multis  gravihusque  17  decembris 
1860. 

Alloc.  Jamdudum  cernitnus  18  martii 
1861. 

38.  Divisiofii  Ecclesice  in  ori- 
entalem  atque  occidentalem  nimia 
RomanoTum  Pontificum  arbitria 
contulerunt. 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostoUcce  22  augusti 
185L 

§  VI. — EEKOEES  DE  SOCIETATE  CIVI- 
LI  TUM  IN  SE,  TUM  IN  SUIS  AD 
ECCLESIAM  RELATIONIBUS  SPEC- 
TATA. 

39.  ReijpuhliccB  status,  ut^ote 
omnium  jurium  origo  et  fons, 
jure  quodam  jpollet  nullis  circum- 
scripto  limitibus. 

Alloc.  Maxima  quidem  9  junii  1862. 

40.  Catholicce  Ecclesia  doctrina 


City  of  Rome  to  some  other  bish- 
opric and  some  other  city. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostolicce,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

36.  The  definition  of  a  national 
council  does  not  admit  of  any  sub- 
sequent discussion,  and  the  civil  pow- 
er can  regard  as  settled  an  affair 
decided  by  such  national  council. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostoUcce,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

37.  National  churches  can  be 
established,  after  being  withdrawn 
and  plainly  separated  from  the  au- 
thority of  the  Roman  Pontiff. 

Allocution  Multis  gravihusque,  17th  De- 
cember, 1860. 

Allocution  Jamdudum  cernimus,  18th 
March,  1861. 

38.  Roman  Pontiffs  have,  by  their 
too  arbitrary  conduct,  contributed 
to  the  division  of  the  Church  into 
eastern  and  western. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostoUcce,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

§  yi. — ERRORS  ABOUT  CIVIL  SOCIE- 
TY, C0NSIDEREI3  BOTH  IN  ITSELF 
AND  IN  ITS  RELATION  TO  THE 
CHURCH. 

39.  The  commonwealth  is  the 
origin  and  source  of  all  rights,  and 
possesses  rights  which  are  not  cir- 
cumscribed by  any  limits. 

Allocution  JI/axiTwa  quidem,  9th  June,  1862. 

40.  The  teaching  of  the  Catholic 


u 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  .ERRORS. 


119 


hamancB  societatis  hono  et  commo- 
dis  adversatur. 

Epist.  encycL  Qui  pluribus  9  novembris 
1816. 

Alloc.  Quihus  quantisque  20  aprilis 
1849. 

41.  Civili  jpotestati  vel  db  in- 
fideli  imjperante  exercitca  com- 
jpetit  potestas  indirecta  nega- 
tiva  in  sacra;  eidem  proinde 
comjpetit  nedum  jus  quod  vocant 
exequatur,  sed  etiam  jus  appel- 
lationis,  quam  nuncitpa^it,  ab 
abusu. 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostoltcce  22  augusti 
1851. 

42.  I7i  conflictu  legum  utrius- 
que  potestatis  ju$  civile  prceva- 
let. 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostolicce  22  augusti 
1851. 

43.  Laica  jpotestas  auctorita- 
tem  hdbet  rescindendi,  declarandi 
ac  faciendi .  irritas  solemnes  con- 
ventiones  {vulgo  Concordata)  su- 
])er  usu  jurium  ad  ecclesiasti- 
cam  immunitatem  jpertinentium 
cmn  Sede  Ajpostolica  initas,  si?ie 
hujus  consensic,  immo  et  ea  re- 
clamante. 

Alloc.  In  Consistoriali  1  novembris  1850. 
Alloc.  Multis  gravihusque  17  decembris 
1860. 

44.  Civilis  auctoritas  potest  se 
iminiscere  rebus  quce  ad  religio- 
neni,   inores  et  regimen   spiritu- 


Church  is  opposed  to  the  well-being 
and  interests  of  society. 

Enc}'clical  Letters,  Qui  pluribus^  9th  No- 
vember, 1846. 

Allocution  Quihus  quantisque,  20th  April, 
1849. 

41.  The  civil  power,  even  when 
exercised  by  an  unbelieving  sover- 
eign, possesses  an  indirect  and  neg- 
ative power  over  religious  affairs. 
It  therefore  possesses  not  only  the 
right  called  that  of  exequaticr,  but 
that  of  the  (so-called)  qppellatio 
db  abusu. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostoUcce,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

42.  In  the  case  of  conflicting 
laws  between  the  twO  powers,  the 
civil  law  ought  to  prevail. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostolicce,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

43.  The  civil  power  has  a  right 
to  break,  and  to  declare  and  ren- 
der null,  the  conventions  (commonly 
called  Concordats)  concluded  with 
the  Apostolic  See,  relative  to  tlie' 
use  of  rights  appertaining  to  the 
ecclesiastical  immunity,  without 
the  consent  of  the  Holy  See,  and 
even  contrary  to  its  protest. 

Allocution  In  Consistoriali,  1st  Nov.,  1850. 
Allocution  Muhis  gravibusque,  17th  De- 
cember, 1800. 

44.  The  civil  authority  may  in- 
terfere in  matters  relating  to  re- 
ligion, morality,  and  spiritual  gov- 


120 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


ale  jpertinent  Hinc  potest  de 
instructionibus  judicare,  quas 
£cclesicB  jpastores  ad  consdentia- 
rum  normavi  jpro  suo  inunere 
edunt^  quin  etiam  potest  de  di- 
vinorum  sacramentorum  admi- 
nistratione  et  dispositionibus  ad 
ea  suscijpienda  necessariis  decer- 
nere. 

Alloc.  In  Consistoriali  1  novembris  1850. 
Alloc.  Maxima  quidem  9  junii  1862. 

45.  Totum  scholarum  ^ublica- 
rurri  regimen^  in  qiiibus  juventus 
Christianoe  alicujus  reijpublicoB 
instituitur,  ejpiscojpalihus  dum- 
taxat  seminariis  aliqua  ratione 
exc€j)tis,  jpotest  ac  debet  attribui 
auctoritati  civili,  et  ita  quidem 
attribui,  xit  nullam  alii  cuicum- 
que  auctoritati  recognoscatitr  jus 
immiscendi  se  in  discijplina  scho- 
lar um,  in  regimine  studiorum, 
in  graduum  collatione,  in  dilectu 
aut  ajpprohatione  magistrorum. 

Alloc.  In  Consistoriali  1  novembris  1850. 
Alloc.  Quibus  luctuosissimis  5  septembris 
1851. 

46.  Immo  in  ipsis  clericorum 
seminariis  metliodus  studiorura 
adhihenda  civili  au<itoritati  sub- 
jicitiir. 

Alloc.  Nunquamfore  15  decembris  1856. 

47.  Postulat  ojptima  civilis  so- 
cietatis  ratio,  %it  jpojpulares  scholoe, 
qucB  patent  omnibus  cuj usque  e 
pojpulo  classis  pueris,  ac  jpublica 


ernment  Hence  it  has  control 
over  the  instructions  for  the  guid- 
ance of  consciences  issued,  conform- 
ably with  their  mission,  by  the  pas- 
tors of  the  Church.  Further,  it  pos- 
sesses power  to  decree,  in  the  matter 
of  administering  the  divine  sacra- 
ments, as  to  the  dispositions  neces* 
sary  for  their  reception. 

Allocution  In  Consistoriali,  1st  Nov.,  1850. 
Allocution  ilfazma  quidem,  9th  June,  1862. 

45.  The  entire  direction  of  pub- 
lic schools,  in  whicli  the  youth  of 
Christian  states  are  educated,  ex- 
cept (to  a  certain  extent)  in  the  case 
of  episcopal  seminaries,  may  and 
must  appertain  to  the  civil  power, 
and  belong  to  it  so  far  that  no  other 
authority  whatsoever  shall  be  recog- 
nized as  having  any  right  to  inter- 
fere in  the  discipline  of  the  schools, 
the  arrangement  of  the  studies,  the 
taking  of  degrees,  or  the  choice  and 
approval  of  the  teachers. 

Allocution  In  Consistoriali,  1  st  Nov. ,  1 850. 
Allocution  Quibus  luctuosissimis,  5th  Sep- 
tember, 1851. 

46.  Much  more,  even  in  clerical 
seminaries,  the  method  of  study  to 
be  adopted  is  subject  to  the  civil 
authority. 

Allocution  Nunquam  fore^  15  Dec,  1856. 

47.  The  best  theory  of  civil  so- 
ciety requires  that  popular  schools 
open  to  the  children  of  all  classes, 
and,  generally,  all  public  institutes 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERROKS. 


121 


universim  histituta,  qucB  litteris 
severiorihusque  diseipUnis  traden- 
dis  et  educationi  jicventutis  curan- 
dcB  sunt  destinata,  eximantur  ah 
07nni  Ecclesioe  auctoritate^  modera- 
trice  vi  et  ingerentia,  ^lenoque  ci- 
vilis  ao  politiccB  auctoritatis  arhi- 
trio  subjiciantuT  ad  imperantium 
jplacita  et  ad  communium  cetatis 
ojpinionum  amussim. 

Epist.  ad  Archiep.  Friburg.  Qaum  non 
sine  14  julii  1864. 

48.  CatJwlicis  mris  jprohari 
jpotest  ea  juventutis  instituendce 
ratio^  quoe  sit  a  Catholica  fide 
et  ah  Ecclesioe  jpotestate  sejuncta, 
quceque  rerum  dumtaxat  natu- 
ralium  scientiam  ac  terrenod  so- 
cialis  vitoe  fines  tantummo- 
do  vel  saltern  jprimario  sjpec- 
tet. 

Epist.  ad  Archiep.  Friburg.  Quum  non 
sine  14  julii  1864. 

49.  Civilis  auctoritas  potest 
impedire  quo?7iinus  sacrorum 
antistites  et  fideles  populi  cum 
Romano  Pontifice  libere  ac  mu- 
tuo  communicent. 

Alloc.  Maxima  quidem  9  junii  1862. 

50.  Laica  auctoritas  hahet  per 
se  jus  proesentandi  episcopos 
et  potest  ah  illis  exigere,  ut 
ineant  dioecesium  procuratio- 
nem,, antequam  ipsi  canoni- 
cam    a    S,    Sede    instltutio7ie?n 


intended  for  instruction  in  letters 
and  philosophy,  and  for  conduct- 
ing the  education  of  the  young, 
should  be  freed  from  all  ecclesias- 
tical authority,  government,  and  in- 
terference, and  should  be  fully  sub- 
ject to  the  civil  and  political  power, 
in  conformity  with  the  will  of  rulers 
and  the  prevalent  opinions  of  the 
age.  - 

Letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Fribourg, 
Quum  non  sine,  14th  July,  1864. 

48.  This  system  of  instructins: 
youth,  which  consists  in  separating 
it  from  the  Catholic  faith  and  from 
the  power  of  the  Church,  and  in 
teaching  exclusively,  or  at  least  pri- 
marily, the  knowledge  of  natural 
things  and  the  earthly  ends  of  so- 
cial life  alone,  may  be  approved  by 
Catholics. 

Letter  to-  the  Archbishop  of  Fribourg, 
Quum  non  sine,  14th  July,  1864. 

49.  The  civil  power  has  the  right 
to  prevent  ministers  of  religion, 
and  the  faithful,  from  conimuni- 
cating  freely  and  mutually  with 
each  other,  and  with  the  Roman 
Pontiff. 

Allocution  il/axiwa  quidem,  9th  June,  1862. 

60.  The  secular  authority  pos- 
sesses, as  inherent  in  itself,  the  right 
of  presenting  bishops,  and  may  re- 
quire of  them  that  they  take  pos- 
session of  their  dioceses  before 
having  received  canonical  institu^ 


122 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


et     ajpostolicas     litteras     accijpi- 
ant. 

Alloc.  Nunquam  fore  15  decembris  1856. 

51.  Iinmo  laicum  guhernium 
habet  jus  dejponendi  db  exer- 
citio  jpastoralis  ministerii  ejpis- 
cojpos^  neqike  tenetur  obedire 
Romano  Pontifici  in  Us  quce 
episcojpatuuvi  et  ejpiscojporum  re- 
spiciimt  institutionem. 

Litt.  Apost,  Multiplices  inter  10  junii 
1851. 

Alloc.  Acerbissimum  27  septembris  1 852. 

52.  Gubemium  jpotest  suo  jure 
imm.utare  cetatein  ab  Ecclesia 
jprcesa'vpta7n  jpro  religiosa  tarn 
inulieruin  qiiam  mroruTn  jpro- 
fessione^  omnibusquB  religiosis 
Jxtmiliis  indicere,  ut  neminem 
sine  suo  jpermissu  ad  soleninia 
vota  nxmcxijpanda  admittant. 

Alloc.  Nunquam  fore  15  decembris  185G. 

53.  Abrogandoe,  sunt  leges  qim 
ad  Teligiosarum  familiarum  sta- 
tum  tutandum,  earumque  jura 
et  officia  pertinent;  immo  jpo- 
test civile  gubemium  Us  omni- 
bus auxilium  jpro^stare^  qui  a 
suscepto  religioscB  vitce  instituto 
deficere  ac  solemnia  "vota  f ran- 
ger e  velint ;  pariterque  potest 
religiosas  easdem  familias  jpe- 
rinde  ao  coUegiatas  Ecclesias^ 
et  henejicia  simjplicia  etiam  ju- 
ris patronatus  jpenitus  extingue- 
re,   illorumque   bona   et    reditus 


tion  and  the  apostolic  letters  fi'om 
the  Holy  See. 

Allocution  Nunquamfore,  15th  Dec,  1850. 

51.  And,  further,  the  secular  gov- 
ernment has  the  right  of  deposing- 
bishops  from  their  pastoral  func- 
tions, and  it  is  not  bound  to  obey 
tlie  Eoman  Pontiff  in  those  thinirs 
which  relate  to  episcopal  sees  and 
the  institution  of  bishops. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Multiplices  inter,  lOtli 
June,  1851. 

Allocution  Acerbissimum,  27th  Sept.,  1852. 

52.  The  government  lias  of  it- 
self the  right  to  alter  the  age  pre- 
scribed by  the  Church  for  the  re- 
ligious profession,  both  of  men  and 
women;  and  it  may  enjoin  upon 
all  religious  establisliments  to  ad- 
mit no  person  to  take  solemn  vows 
without  its  permission. 

Allocution  Nunquam  fore,  1 5th  Dec. ,  1850,    • 

53.  Tlie  laws  for  the  protection 
of  reh'gious  establishments,  and 
securing  their  rights  and  duties, 
ought  to  be  abolished :  nay,  more, 
the  civil  government  may  lend  its 
assistance  to  all  who  desire  to  quit 
the  religious  life  they  have  un- 
dertaken, and  break  their  vows.  ' 
The  government  may  also  sup- 
press religious  orders,  collegiate 
churches,  and  simple  benefices, 
even  those  belonging  to  private 
patronage,  and  submit  their  goods 
and    revenues    to    the    adminis- 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


123 


civilis  potestatis  administrationi 
et  arhitrio  sicbjicere  et  vindicare. 

Alloc.  Acerhissimum  27  septembris  1852. 
Alloc.  Probe  meinineritis  22  januarii  1855. 
Alloc.  Cum  scepe  26  julii  1855. 

64.  lieges  et  jprincipes  non  so- 
lum ah  Ecclesice  jurisdictione 
exirnimtur,  verum  etiam  in  quot- 
stionibus  jurisdictionis  dirimen- 
dis  siijperiores  sunt  Ecclesia. 

Litt.  Apost.  Multiplices  inter  10  junii 
1851. 

65.  Ecclesia  a  Statu,  Status- 
que  ah  Ecclesia  sejungendus 
est. 

Alloc.  Acerhissimum  27  septembris  1852. 

§  VII. — EEEORES   DE   ETHICA  NATU- 
EALI   ET   CHRISTIANA. 

66.  Morum  leges  divina  haud 
egent  sanctione,  minhnegue  ojpus 
est  ut  humance,  leges  ad  naturce 
jus  confirmentiir  aut  dhligandi 
vim  a  Deo  accijpiant. 

Alloc.  Maxima  quidem  9  junii  1862. 

67.  Philosojphicarum  rerum 
morumgue  scientia,  itemque  ci- 
viles  leges  jpossunt  et  dehent  a 
divina  et  ecclesiastica  auctoritate 
declinare. 

Alloc.  Maxima  quidem  9  junii  1862. 

68.  Alice  vires  7ion  sunt  agno- 
scendcB  nisi  illce  qum  in  materia 
joositce  sunt,  et  omnis  morum 
discijplina    honestasque    coUocari 


tration  and  disposal  of   the  civil 
power. 

Allocution  Acerhissimum,  27th  Sept.,  1852. 
Allocution  Prohe  memineritis,  22d  Jan.,  1 855. 
Allocution  Cu7n  scp/;e,  26th  July,  1855. 

64.  Kings  and  princes  ai*e  not 
only  exempt  from  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  Church,  but  are  superior  to 
the  Church,  in  litigated  questions 
of  jurisdiction. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Multiplices  inter,  10th 
Jun3,  1851. 

*66.  The  Church  ought  to  be  sep- 
arated from  the  State,  and  the  State 
from  the  Church. 

Allocution  Acerhissimum,  27th  Sept.,  1852. 

§  YII. — EKEOES   CONCEENING  NATU- 
EAL  AND  CHEISTIAN  ETHICS. 

66.  Moral  laws  do  not  stand  in 
need  of  the  divine  sanction,  and 
there  is  no  necessity  that  human 
laws  should  be  conformable  to  the 
law  of  nature,  and  receive  their 
sanction  from  God. 

Allocution ilifaxma  quidem,  9th  June,! 862. 

67.  Knowledge  of  philosophical 
things  and  morals,  and  also  civil 
laws,  ma}^  and  must  depart  from 
divine  and  ecclesiastical  author- 
ity. 

Allocution  iUTaxma  quidem,  9th  June^  1862. 

68.  No  other  forces  are  to  be 
recognized  than  those  which  reside 
in  matter ;  and  all  moral  teaching 
and  moral  excellence  ought  to  be 


124 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  EERORS. 


dehet  in,  cumulandis  et  atcgen- 
dis  quovis  modo  divitiis  ac  in 
voluptatihis  explendis. 

Alloc.  Maxima  quidem  9  junii  18G2. 
Epist.  encycl.  Quanta  conjiciamur  10  au- 
gust! 18G3. 

59.  Jus  in  materiali  facto  con- 
sistit,  et  omnia  hominum  officia 
sunt  nomen  inane,  et  omnia  hu- 
mana  facta  juris  mm,  hdbent. 

Alloc.  Maxima  quidem  9  junii  1862. 

60.  Auctoritas  nihil  aliud  est 
nisi  numeri  et  materialium,  viri- 
um.  summa. 

Alloc.  Maxima  quidem  9  junii  1862. 

61.  Fortunata  factl  injustitia 
nullum,  juris  sanctitati  detrimen- 
tum  affert. 

Alloc.  Jamdudum  cernimus  18  martii 
1861. 

62.  Proclamandum  est  et  oh- 
servandum  jprincijpium  quod  vo- 
cant  de  non-interventii. 

Alloc.  Novos  et  ante  28  septembris  1860. 

63.  Legitimis  ^rincipihus  ohe- 
dientiam,  detrectare,  immo  et  re- 
hellare  licet. 

Epist.  encycl.  Qui  pluribus  9  novembris 
1846. 

Alloc.  Quisque  vestrum  4  octobris  1847. 

Epist.  encycl.  Noscitis  et  Nobiscum  8  de- 
cembris  1849. 

Litt.  Apost.  Cum.  catholica  26  martii 
1860. 

64.  Turn  cujusque  sanctissimi 


made  to  consist  in  the  accumula- 
tion and  increase  of  riches  by  every 
possible  means,  and  in  the  enjoy- 
ment of  pleasure. 

Allocution  Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862. 
Encyclical   Letters,    Quanta   conjiciamur, 
10th  August,  18G3. 

59.  Right  consists  in  the  mate- 
rial fact,  and  all  human  duties  are 
but  vain  words,  and  all  human  acts 
have  the  force  of  right. 

AMocxxiioxi  Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862. 

60.  Authority  is  nothing  else  but 
the  result  of  numerical  superiority 
and  material  force. 

Allocution  Max? ///«  quidem,  9th  June,  1862. 

61.  An  unjust  act,  being  suc- 
cessful, inflicts  no  injury  upon  the 
sanctity  of  right. 

Allocution  Jamdudum  cernimus,  18th 
March,  1861. 

*  62.  The  principle  of  non-inter- 
vention, as  it  is  called,  ought  to  be 
proclaimed  and  adhered  to. 

Allocution  Novos  et  ante,  28th  Sept.,  1860. 

63.  It  is  allowable  to  refuse  obe- 
dience to  legitimate  princes:  nay, 
more,  to  rise  in  insurrection  against 
them. 

Encyclical  Letters,  Qui  pluribus,  9th  No- 
vember, 1846. 

Allocution  Quisque  vestrum,  4th  Oct.,  1847. 

Encyclical  Letters,  Noscitis  et  Nobiscum, 
8th  December,  1849. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Cum  catholica,  26th 
March,  1860. 

•  64.  The  violation  of  a  solemn 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


125 


jurarnenti  violatio,  turn  quoeli- 
het  scelesta  flagitiosaque  actio 
semj)itern(B  legi  r&pugnans,  non 
solum  hand  est  imjprobanda,  ve- 
rum  etiam  oranino  licita,  sum- 
misgue  laudibus  efferenda,  quan- 
do  id  jpro  jpatricB  amove  agatur. 

Alloc.  Quibus  quantisque  20  aprilis 
1849. 

§  VIII. —  EEROEES   DE   MATEIMONIO 
CHEISTIANO. 

65.  Nulla  ratione  ferri  jpotest, 
Christum  evexisse  matrim.oniur)% 
ad  dignitatem  saoraiinenti, 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostolkcE.  22  augusti 
1851. 

^Q.  Matrimonii  sacr amentum 
non  est  nisi  quid  eontractui  acces- 
sorium  ab  eoque  se^arahile,  ipsum- 
que  sacramentum  in  una  tantum 
nuptiali  henedictione  situm  est. 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostolicce  22  augusti 
1851. 

67.  Jure  natu7'ce  matrimonii 
vinculum  no7i  est  indissoluhile 
et  in  variis  casihus  di'oortium 
jprojprie  dictum  auctoritate  ci~ 
vili  sanciri  jpotest. 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostoliccR  22  augusti 
1851. 

AYLoQ.  Acerbissimum  27  septembris  1852. 

QS.  Ecclesia  non  hahet  potesta- 
tem  imjpedimenta  matrimonium 
dirimentia  inducendi^  sed  ea  jpo- 
testas  civili  auctoritati  comjpetit^ 


oath,  even  every  wicked  and  fla- 
gitious action  repugnant  to  the 
eternal  law,  is  not  only  not  blam- 
able,  but  quite  lawful,  and  wor- 
thy of  the  highest  praise,  when 
done  for  the  love  of  coun- 
try. 

Allocution  Quibus  quantisque,  20th  April, 
1849. 

§  YIII. — THE    EEEOES    CONCERNING 
CHEISTIAN  MAEEIAGE. 

65.  It  can  not  be  by  any  means 
tolerated,  to  maintain  that  Christ 
has  raised  marriage  to  the  dignity 
of  a  sacrament. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostolicce,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

66.  The  sacrament  of  marriage 
is  only  an  adjunct  of  the  contract, 
and  separable  from  it,  and  the  sac- 
rament itself  consists  in  the  nup- 
tial benediction  alone. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostolicce,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

67.  By  the  law  of  nature,  the 
marriage  tie  is  not  indissoluble, 
and  in  many  cases  divorce,  prop- 
erly so  called,  may  be  pronounced 
by  the  civil  authority. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostolicce,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

Allocution  Acerbissimum,  27th  Sept.  1852. 

68.  The  Church  has  not  the  power 
of  laying  down  what  are  diriment 
impediments  to  marriage.  The 
civil  authority  does  possess  such  a 


126 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


a    qua    impedimenta    existentia 
tollenda  sunt. 

Litt.  Apost.  M^hipUces  inter  10  junii 
3851. 

69.  Ecclesia  sequioi'ibus  scecu- 
lis  dirimentia  impedimenta  in- 
ducer e  coepit,  non  jure  propria , 
sed  illo  jure  usa^  quod  a  civili 
potestate  mutuata  erat. 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostolica  22  augnsti 
1851. 

70.  Tridentini  cdnones,  qui 
anathematis  censuram  illis  in- 
ferunt^  qui  facidtatem  impedi- 
menta dirimentia  inducendi  Ec- 
clesicB  negare  audeant,  vel  non 
sunt  dogmatici  vel  de  Jiac 
Tnutuata  potestate  intelligendi 
sunt. 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostoUcce  22  augusti 
1851. 

Yl.  Tridentini  forma  siib  in- 
firraitatis  poena  non  ohligat,  uhi 
lex  civilis  aliam  formam  prce- 
stituat,  et  velit  hac  nova  forma 
interveniente  matrimoniu7n  va- 
lere. 

Litt,  Apost.  Ad  apostoUccB  22  augusti 
1851. 

72.  Bonifacius  YIIL  votum 
castitatis  in  ordinatione  emis- 
sum  nuptias  nullas  reddere  pri- 
mus asseruit. 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostoUcce.  22  augusti 
1851. 


power,  and  can  do  away  with  exist. 
ing  impediments  to  marriage. 

Apostolic  Letter,  MullipUces  inter,  10th 
June,  1851. 

69.  The  Church  only  commenced 
in  later  ages  to  bring  in  diriment 
impediments,  and  then  availing  her- 
self of  a  right  not  her  own,  hut 
borrowed  from  the  civil  power. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostoUcce,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

70.  The  canons  of  the  Council 
of  Trent,  which  pronounce  censure 
of  anathema  against  those  who  de- 
ny to  the  Church  the  right  of  lay- 
ing down  what  are  diriment  imped- 
iments, either  are  not  dogmatic,  or 
must  be  understood  as  referrinc: 
only  to  such  borrowed  power. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostoUcce,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

71.  The  form  of  solemnizing  mar- 
riage prescribed  by  the  said  Council, 
under  penalty  of  nullity,  does  not 
bind  in  cr.Gcs  vrhere  the  civil  law  has 
appointed  another  form,  and  where 
it  decrees  that  this  new  form  shall 
effectuate  a  valid  marriage. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostoUcce,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

72.  Boniface  YIII.  is  the  first 
who  declared  that  the  vow  of 
chastity  pronounced  at  ordination 
annuls  nuptials. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostoUcce,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


127 


73.  Vi  contractus  mere  civilis 
potest  inter  Christianos  constare 
veri  nominis  matrimonmni ; 
falsumque  est,  aut  contractum 
matrimonii  inter  Christianos 
semper  esse  sacramentum,  aut 
nullum  esse  contractum,  si  sa- 
cramentum  excludatur. 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostoliccE  22  augusti 
18:>1. 

Lettera  di  S.  S.  PIO  IX.  al  Re  di  Sardeg- 
na  9  setterabre  1852. 

Alloc.  Acerhissimum  27  septembris  1852. 

Alloc.  Multis  gravihusque  17  decembris 
1860. 

74.  CausscB  matrimoniales  et 
sponsalia  suapte  natura  ad  fo- 
rum civile  pertinent. 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostolkcB  22  augusti 
1851. 

Alloc.  Acerhissimum  27  septembris  1852. 

N.  B. — Hue  facer  e  possunt  duo  alii  errores 
de  clericorum  ccelibatu  aholendo  et  de  statu 
matrimonii  statui  virginitatis  anteferendo. 
(^Confodiuntur,  prior  in  epist.  encycl.  Qui 
pluribus  9  novemhris  184(5,  posterior  in 
litteris  apost.  Multiplices  inter  10  junii 
1851.) 


§  IX.-^EEEORES    DE    CIVILI    EOMANI 
PONTIFICIS  PRINCIPATU. 

75.  De  temporalis  regni  cum 
spirituali  compatihilitate  dispu- 
tant inter  se  Christiance  et  Ca- 
tJiollcce  Ecclesim  filii, 

Litt.  Apost.  Ad  apostolicae.  22  augusti 
1851. 


73.  A  merely  civil  contract  may, 
among  Christians,  constitute  a  true 
marriage ;  and  it  is  false,  either 
that  the  marriage  contract  be- 
tween Christians  is  always  a  sac- 
rament, or  that  the  contract  is 
null  if  the  sacrament  be  exclud- 
ed. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostolicae.,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

Letter  to  the  King  of  Sardinia,  9th  Sep- 
tember, 1852. 

Allocution  Acerhissimum,  27th  Sept.,  1852. 

Allocution  Multis  gravihusque,  17th  De- 
cember, 1860. 

74.  Matrimonial  causes  and  es- 
pousals belong  by  their  very  nature 
to  civil  jurisdiction. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostolicce,  22d  Au- 
gust, 1851. 

Allocution  Acerbissimu?n,  27th  Sept.,  1852. 

N.  B. — Tvvo  other  errors  may  tend  in  this 
direction,  those  upon  the  abolition  of  the  celib- 
acy of  priests,  and  the  preference  due  to  the 
state  of  marriage  over  that  of  virginity.  These 
have  been  proscribed ;  the  first  in  the  Ency- 
clical Qui  pluribus,  Nov.  9,  1846;  the  second 
in  the  Apostolic  Letter  Multiplices  inter, 
June  10th,  1851. 

§  IX. — ERRORS  REGARDING  THE  CIVIL 
POWER  OF  THE  SOVEREIGN  PONTIFF. 

75.  The  children  of  the  Christian 
and  Catholic  Church  are  not  agreed 
upon  the  compatibility  of  the  tem- 
poial  with  the  spiritual  power. 

Apostolic  Letter,  Ad  apostolica,  22d  Au- 
gust, 185*1. 


128 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


t6.  Ahrogatio  civilis  imperii, 
quo  Ajpostolica  Sedes  jpotitur,  ad 
EcclesicB  lihertatem  felicitatem- 
qice  vel  inaxime  conduceret. 


Alloc. 
1849. 


Quibus     quantisque     20     aprilis 


N.  B. — Prceter  hos  errores  expUcite  nota- 
tos,  alii  complures  implicite  reprobaniur,  pro- 
posita  et  asserta  doctrina,  quam  Catkolici 
ovines  Jirmissime  retinere  debeant,  de  civili 
Romani  Pontijicis  principatu.  (^Ejusmodi 
doctrina  luculenter  traditur  in  Alloc.  Quibus 
quantisque  20  aprilis  1849 ;  in  Alloc.  Si  semper 
antea  20  maii  1850 ;  in  Litt.  apost.  Quum 
Catholica  Ecdesia  26  martii  18G0;  in  Alloc. 
Novos  28  sept.  1860;  in  Alloc.  Jamdudum 
18  martii  1861;  in  Alloc.  Maxima  quidem  9 
junii  1862. 


§  X. EKROEES    QUI   AD  LIBERALIS- 

MUM  HODIEKNUM  EEFERUNTUR. 

V7.  jEtate  hac  nostra  non  am- 
jplius  exjpedit,  religionem  Catho- 
licam  haheri  tarnquarn  unicam 
Status  religionem,  ceteris  ouihus- 
cumque  cultihus  exclusis. 

Alloc.  Nemo  vestrum  26  jalii  1855. 

78.  Ilinc  laudabiliter  in  qui- 
husdam  Catholici  nomhiis  regio- 
nibus  lege  cautum  est,  ut  ho- 
minihus  illuc  immigrantibus  li- 
ceat  publicum  jprojprii  cujusque 
cultus  exercitium  habere. 

Alloc.  AcerUssimum  27  septembris  1 852. 

79.  Enimvero  falsum  est,  civi- 
lem   cujusque    cultus   liber  tat  em, 


76.  The  abolition  of  the  tempo- 
ral power,  of  which  the  Apostolic  / 

I 


See  is  possessed,  would  contribute 
in  the  greatest  degree  to  the  liberty 
and  prosperity  of  the  Church.         ^ 

Allocution  Quibus  quantisque,  20th  April, 
1849. 

N.B. — Besides  these  errors,  explicitly  noted, 
many  others  are  impliedly  rebuked  by  the  pro- 
posed and  asserted  doctrine,  which  all  Cath- 
olics are  bound  most  firmly  to  hold,  touching 
the  temporal  sovereignty  of  the  Roman  Pon- 
tiff. These  doctrines  are  clearly  stated  in  the 
Allocutions  Quibus  quantisque,  20th  April, 
1 849,  and  Si  semper  antea,  20th  May,  1850 ; 
Apost.  Letter  Q^mm  Catholica  Ecdesia,  20th 
March,  1860  ;  Allocutions  Novos,  28th  Sept., 
1860;  Jamdudum,  18th  March,  1861;  and 
Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862. 


§  X.  —  ERRORS    HAVING    REFERENCE 
TO  MODERN   LIBERALISM. 

78.  In  the  present  day,  it  is  no  if 
longer  expedient  that  the  Catliolicji 
religion  shall  be  held  as  the  only 
religion  of  the  State,  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  all  other  modes  of  worship. 

Allocution  Nemo  vestrum,  26th  July,  1855. 

78.  Whence  it  has  been  wisely 
provided  by  law,  in  some  countries 
called  Catholic,  that  persons  corfi- 
ing  to  reside  therein  shall  enjOy 
the  public  exercise  of  their  own 
worship. 

AWocMiion  AcerUssimum,  27th  Sept.,  1852. 

79.  Moreover,  it  is  false  that  tlie 
civil  liberty  of  every  mode  of  wor- 


THE  PAPAL  SYLLABUS  OF  ERRORS. 


129 


itemque  jplenam  jpotestatem  om- 
nibus attributam  qiiaslibet  ojpi- 
niones  cogitationesque  jpalam  jpu- 
bliceque  manifestandl  conducere 
ad  jpojpuloTum  mores  aniinosque 
facilius  corrumjpendos  ao  in- 
differentismi  jpestem  jprojpogan- 
dam. 

Alloc.  Nunq^iiam  fore  15  decembris  185G. 

80.  Bomanus  Pontifix  potest 
ao  debet  cum  jprogressu^  cum  li- 
ber cdismo  et  cum  recenii  civili- 
tate  sese  reconciliare  et  comjpo- 
ncrc. 

Alloc.  Jamdudum  cernimus  18  martii 
1861. 


sliip,  and  the  full  power  given  to 
all  of  overtly  and  publicly  mani- 
festing their  opinions  and  their 
ideas,  of  all  kinds  whatsoever,  con- 
duce more  easily  to  corrupt  the 
morals  and  minds  of  the  people, 
and  to  the  propagation  of  the  pest 
of  indifferentism. 

Allocution  Nunquamfore,  15th  Dec,  185G. 

•  80.  The  Eoman  Pontiff  can  and 
ought  to  reconcile  himself  to,  and 
agree  with,  progress,  liberalism, 
and  civilization  as  lately  intro- 
duced. 

Allocution    Jamdudum     cernimvs,     18tli 
March,  1861. 


DECRETi  DOGMATICA  CONCILTI  YATICANI  DE  FIDE 
CATHOLICA  ET  DE  ECCLESIA  CHRISTI. 

[The  D0GMA.TIC  Decrees  of  the  Yatican  Council  concerning  the 
Catholic  Faith  and  the  Chuech  of  Christ.     A.D.  1870.] 


[The  Latin  text  from  Acta  et  Decreta  sacrosancti  et  cecumenici  Concilii  Vaticani,  etc.,  ctim  permissione 
superiorum,  Fribnrgi  Brisgoviae,  1871,  Fasc.  II.  pp.  170-1T9,  aud  181-187.  The  Englif^h  translation  from- 
Archbishop  Manning  :  Petri  Privilegium,  London,  1871,  Part  HI.  pp.  192-203,  and  211-219.  On  the  Vati- 
can Council,  see  the  preceding  history.] 


constitutio  dogmatica  de  fide 
Catholica. 

Sessio  IIL  Ilabita  die  24  Aprilis 

1870. 

PIUS  EPISCOPUS,  SERVUS  SERVORUM 
DEI,  SACRO  APPEOBANTE  CONCILIO, 
AD   PERPETUAM   REI  MEMORIAM. 

J)ei  Films  et  generis  humani 
Bedemjptor,  Dominus  Noster  Je- 
sus Christus,  ad  Patrem  coele- 
stern  redituricSj  cum  Ecclesia 
sua  in  terris  inilitante  omni- 
hus  diehus  %isque  ad  consumma- 
tionem  scBCuU  futurum  se  esse 
jpTomisit.  Quare  dilectm  sjpon- 
scB  prcesto  esse,  adsistere  docenti, 
oj^eranti  henedicere,  jpericlitanti 
oj^em  ferre  nullo  unquatn  tem- 
j^ore  destitit.  Hcec  vero  salu- 
taris  ejus  providentia,  cum  ex 
aliis  heneficiis  innumeris  conti- 
nenter  apj)artdt,  tuvi  iis  mani- 
festissime  comjperta  est  fructi- 
bus,  qui  orbi  Cliristiano  e  Con- 
ciliis  cecumenicis.  ac  nominatim 


Dogmatic   Constitution  on   the 
Cathplic  Faith. 

Puhlished  in  the  Third  Session, 
held  April  24, 1870. 

PIUS,  BISHOP,  SERVANT  OF  THE  SERV- 
ANTS OF  GOD,  WITH  THE  APPROVAL 
OF  THE  SACRED  COUNCIL,  FOR  PER- 
PETUAL REMEMBRANCE. 

Onr  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son 
of  God,  ^nd  Eedeemer  of  Man- 
kind, before  returning  to  his  heav- 
enly Father,  promised  that  he  would 
be  with  the  Church  Militant  on 
earth  all  days,  even  to  the  consum- 
mation of  the  world.  Therefore, 
he  has  never  ceased  to  be  present 
with  his  beloved  Spouse,  to  assist 
her  when  teaching,  to  bless  her  when 
at  work,  and  to  aid  her  when  in 
danger.  And  this  his  salutary  prov- 
idence, which  has  been  constantly 
displayed  by  other  innumerable 
benefits,  has  been  most  manifestly 
proved  by  the  abundant  good  re- 
sults which  Christendom  has  de- 
rived from  oecumenical  Councils, 


132 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


e  TridentinOj  iniquis  licet  tempo- 
rihus  celebrato,  amjplissimi  j)ro- 
venerunt.  Hinc  enim  sanctissi- 
ma  7'eligionis  dogmata  pressius 
definita  uberiusque  exjjosita,  er- 
rores  damnati  atque  coliihiti ; 
tiiiiG  ecclesiastica  disciplina  re- 
stituta  firmiiisqiie  sancita,  jpro- 
motum  in  clero  scientice  et  pie- 
tatis  studium,  joarata  adolescen- 
tibus  ad  sacram  'militiam  edu- 
candis  collegia^  Christiaiii  de- 
nique  populi  'mores  et  accu- 
rat  tore  fidelium  eruditione  et 
freguentiore  sacramentorum  usu 
instaurati,  Ilino  jproeterea  arc- 
tior  inemhroriim  cum  msihili 
Cajpite  communio,  universogue 
■covpori  Christi  7nystico  additus 
vigor y'  hinc  religiosce  multi/pli- 
catce  famiVm  aliague  ChristiancB 
jpietatis  instituta;  hinc  ille  etl- 
am  assiduus  et  usque  ad  san- 
guinis effusionem  constans  ardor 
in  Christi  regno  late  jper  orbem 
jprojpagando. 


Yerumtamen  hcec  aliaque  in- 
signia emolumenta^  quce  per 
ultimam  .  maxime  cecumenicam. 
Synodum  divina  dementia  Ec- 
desice  largita  est,  dum  grato^  quo 
par .  est,  animo  recolimus,  acer- 
hum  compescere  haud  possumus 
dolor  em  oh  mala  gravissima,  inde 


and  particularly  from  that  of  Trent, 
altliongh  it  was  held  in  evil  times. 
For,  as  a  consequence,  the  sacred 
doctrines  of  the  faith  have  been  de- 
fined more  closely,  and  set  forth 
more  fully,  errors  have  been  con- 
demned and  restrained,  ecclesiasti- 
cal discipline  has  been  restored  and 
more  firmly  secured,  the  love  of 
learning  and  of  piety  has  been  pro- 
moted among  the  clergy,  colleges 
have  been  established  to  educate 
youth  for  the  sacred  warfare,  and 
the  morals  of  the  Christian  world 
have  been  renewed  by  the  more  ac- 
curate training  of  the  faithful,  and 
by  the  more  frequent  use  of  the  sac- 
raments. Moreover,  there  has  re- 
sulted a  closer  communion  of  the 
members  with  the  visible  head,  an 
increase  of  vigor  in  the  whole  mys- 
tical body  of  Christ,  the  multipli- 
cation of  religious  congregations, 
and  of  other  institutions  of  Chris- 
tian piety,  and  such  ardor  in  extend- 
ing the  kiugclom  of  Christ  through- 
out the  world  as  constantly  endures, 
even  to  the  sacrifice  of  life  itself. 

But  while  we  recall  with  due 
thankfulness  these  and  other  sig- 
nal benefits  which  the  divine 
mercy  has  bestowed  on  the 
Church,  especially  by  the  last 
oecumenical  Council,  we  can  not 
restrain  our  bitter  sorrow  for 
the   grave   evils,  which   are  prin- 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


133 


2)otlssimuvi  orta,  quod  ejusdem 
^ac/osanctod  Synodi  ajpud  jper- 
inultos  vel  auctoritas  conteirvpta, 
vel  sajpientissima  negleda  fueve 
deer  eta, 

Nem,o  enim  ignorat,  Itc^reses^ 
quas  Tridentini  P aires  proscrijp- 
serunt^  ditm,  rejecto  divino  Ec- 
clesice  magisterio^  res  ad  religio- 
n€7n  sjpectantcs  j>rivati  cujusvis 
judicio  permittereiitiir^  in  sec- 
tas  jpaidlatim  dissolutas  esse 
midiiplices,  quihus  inter  se  dis- 
sentientibus  et  concertantihus^ 
omnis  tandem  in  Christuin  Jides 
aypud  non  jpaucos  labefactata  est. 
Itaqxie  ipsa  Sacra  Bihlia^  quoe 
antea  Christians  doctrince  uni- 
ces fans  et  judex  asserebantur^ 
jam  non  pro  divinis  haleri,  imo 
mytJiicis  commentls  accenseri  coe- 
jpevunt. 

Turn  nata  est  et  late  nimis 
per  orhem  vagata  ilia  rationa- 
lismi  seic  naturalismi  doctrina, 
quce  religioni  Christiance  utpote 
supernaturali  instituto  per  oin- 
nia  adversans,  sxtmnio  studio 
inolitur,  ut  Christo^  qui  solus 
DoTninus  et  Salvator  noster  est, 
a  mentibus  humanis,  a  vita  et 
morihus  populorum  excluso,  me- 
r(E  quod  vocant  rationis  vel  na- 
titrce  regnum  stabiliatur.  JRe- 
licta  autem  projectaque  Christi- 
ana  religione,  negato    vero   Deo 


cipally  due  to  the  fact  that 
the  authority  of  that  sacred 
Synod  has  been  contemned,  or 
its  wise  decrees  neglected,  by 
many. 

No  one  is  ignorant  that  the  here- 
sies proscribed  by  the  Fathers  of 
Trent,  by  which  the  divine  magis- 
terium  of  the  Church  was  rejected, 
and  all  matters  regarding  religj^on 
were  surrendered  to  the  judgment 
of  each  individual,  gradually  be- 
came dissolved  into  many  sects, 
which  disagreed  and  contended 
with  one  another,  until  at  length 
not  a  few  lost  all  faith  in  Christ. 
Even  the  Holy  Scriptures,  which 
had  previously  been  declared  the 
sole  source  and  judge  of  Christian 
doctrine,  began  to  be  held  no  longer 
as  divine,  but  to  be  ranked  among 
the  fictions  of  mythology. 

Then  there  arose,  and  too  widely 
overspread  the  world,  that  doctrine 
of  rationalism,  or  naturalism,  which 
opposes  itself  in  every  way  to  the 
Christian  religion  as  a  supernatural 
institution,  and  works  with  the  ut- 
most zfeal  in  order  that,  after  Christ, 
our  sole  Lord  and  Saviour,  has  been 
excluded  from  the  minds  of  nlen, 
and  from  the  life  and  moral  acts  of 
nations,  the  reign  of  what  they  call 
pure  reason  of  nature  may  be  estab- 
lished. And  after  forsaking  and  re- 
jecting the  Christian  religion,  and 


134 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


et  Christo  ejus,  prolapsa  tandem 
est  inultoTum  mens  in  Pantlie- 
ismi,  Mate7'ialismi,  Atheismi  ha- 
rathrum,  ut  jam  ipsam  rationa- 
leni  naturam,  omnemque  justi 
rectique  normam  negantes,  ima 
humanoe  societatis  fundamenta 
diruere  connitantiir. 

Ilac  j^ovro  impietate  circum- 
qicaque  grassante,  infelid^er  con- 
tigit,  ut  plures  etiam  e  Catho- 
licce  EcclesicB  filiis  a  via  veroe 
jpietatis  aberrarent,  in  Usque, 
diminutis  paullaiim  veritatibus, 
sensus  Catholicus  attenuaretur. 
Variis  enim  ac  peregrinis  doc- 
trinis  dbducti,  naturam  et  gra- 
tiam,  scientiam  humanam  et 
fidem  divinam  joerperam  com- 
miscentes,  genuinuTn  senswn  dog- 
matuni,  quern  tenet  ac  docet 
sancta  mater  Ecclesia,  depra- 
vare,  integritatemque  et  sinceri- 
tatem  fidei  in  periculum  addii- 
cere  comperiuntur. 

Qiiibus  omnibus  perspectis,  fie- 
ri qui  potest,  ut  non  commove- 
antur  intima  Ecclesim- viscera? 
Quemadmoduin  enim  Deus  vult 
omnes  homines  salvos  fieri,  et 
ad  agnitionem  veritatis  venire; 
quemadmodum  Christus  venit, 
ut  salvum  faceret,  quod  perie- 
rat,  et  filios  Dei,  qui  erant  dis- 
persi^  Gongregaret  in  unum : 
ita  Ecclesia,  a  Deo  populorum 


denying  the  true  God  and  his  Christ, 
the  minds  of  many  have  sunk  into 
the  abyss  of  Pantheism,  Material- 
ism, and  Atheism,  until,  denying 
rational  nature  itself,  and  every 
sound  rule  of  right,  they  labor  to 
destroy  the  deepest  foundations  of 
human  society. 

Unhappily,  it  has  yet  further 
come  to  pass  that,  while  this  im- 
piety prevailed  on  every  side,  many 
even  of  the  children  of  the  Catho- 
lic Church  have  strayed  from  the 
path  of  true4)iety,  and  by  the  grad- 
ual diminution  of  the  truths  they 
held,  the  Catholic  sense  became 
weakened  in  them.  For,  led  away 
by  various  and  strange  doctrines, 
utterly  confusing  nature  and  grace, 
human  science  and  divine  faith, 
they  are  found  to  deprave  the  true 
sense  of  the  doctrines  w^hich  our 
holy  Mother  Cliurch  holds  and 
teaches,  and  endanger  the  integrity 
and  the  soundness  of  the  faitli. 

Considering  these  things, how  can 
the  Church  fail  to  be  deeply  stirred? 
For,  even  as  God  wills  all  men  to 
be  saved,  and  to  arrive  at  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  truth,  even  as  Christ 
came  to  save  what  had  perished, 
and  to  gather  together  the  children 
of  God  who  had  been  dispersed, 
so  the  Church,  constituted  by  God 
the  mother  and  teacher  of  nations, 
knows  its  own  office  as  debtor  to  all, 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


135 


mater  et  magistra  constituta,  om- 
nibus debitricem  se  novit,  ac  lajpsos 
erigere,  labantes  sustinei'e,  rever- 
tentes  amplecti,  confirinare  honos  et 
ad  meliora  jprovehere  jjarata  sem- 
per et  intenta  est,  Quajprojpter  mil- 
lo  tempore  a  Dei  veritate,  quce  sa- 
nat  omnia^  testanda  et prcedicanda 
qiciescere  protest,  sihi  dicticm  esse 
non  ignorans :  Bpiritus  meiis^  qui 
est  hi  te^  et  verba  mea,  quoiposui  in 
ore  tub,  non  recedent  de  ore  tuo 
amodo  et  usque  in  semjnternum, 
Wos  itaque,  iyiJioirentes  prm- 
decessorum  nostroriim  vestigiis^ 
pro  supremo  nostro  Apostolico 
onunere  veritatem  Catholicam  do- 
cere  ac  tueri  perversasque  doa- 
trinas  reprobare  nunquam  in- 
term.issimus.  Nunc  autem,  se- 
dentibus  nobiscum  et  judicanti- 
bus  universi  orbis  Episcopis,  in 
liano  oecumenicam  Synodum  auc- 
toritate  nostra  in  Spiritio  Sancto 
congregatis,  innixi  Dei  verbo 
scripto  et  tradito,  prout  ab  Ec- 
clesia  CatJiolica  sancte  custodi- 
tum  et  genuhie  expositum  accepi- 
mics,  ex  hac  Petri  Cathedra,  in 
consjjectu  omniuQii,  salutarem 
Christi  doctrinam  profiteri  et 
dcclarare  constitaimics,  adversis 
erroribus  potestate  nobis  a  Deo 
tradita  proscriptis  atque  dam- 
natis. 


and  is  ever  ready  and  watchful  to 
raise  the  fallen,  to  support  those 
who  are  falling,  to  embrace  those 
who  return,  to  confirm  the  good  and 
to  carry  them  on  to  better  things. 
Hence,  it  can  never  forbear  from 
witnessing  to  and  proclaiming  the 
truth  of  God,  which  lieals  all  things, 
knowing  the  words  addressed  to  it : 
^  My  Spirit  that  is  in  thee,  and  my 
words  that  I  have  put  in  thy  mouth, 
shall  not  depart  out  of  thy  mouth, 
from  henceforth  and  forever.'  ^ 

We,  tlieref ore,  following  the  foot- 
steps of  our  predecessors,  have  never 
ceased,  as  becomes  our  supreme 
Apostolic  office,  from  teaching  and 
defending  Catholic  truth,  and  con- 
domning  doctrines  of  error.  And 
now",  with  the  Bishops  of  the  whole 
world  assembled  round  us,  and  judg- 
ing with  us,  congregated  by  our  au- 
thority, and  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  in 
this  oecumenical  Council,  we,  sup- 
ported by  the  Word  of  God  written 
and  handed  down  as  w^e  received  it 
from  the  Catholic  Church, preserved 
with  sacredness  and  set  forth  ac- 
cording to  truth,  have  determined 
to  profess  and  declare  the  salutary 
teaching  of  Christ  from  this  Chair 
of  Peter,  and  in  sight  of  all,  pro- 
scribing and  condemning,  by  the 
power  given  to  us  of  God,  all  er 
rors  contrary  thereto. 


Isaiah  lix.  21. 


136 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


Caput  I. 
De  Deo  rerum  omnium  Creatore. 

Sancta  CathoUca  Apostolica 
Bomana  Ecclesia  credit  et  con- 
fitetur,  imum  esse  Dexim  verum 
et  vivum,  Creatorem  ac  Domi- 
nitm  coeli  et  terrce,  omnijpoten- 
tem^  cetermtm^  i?7i7nensu7n,  in- 
coniprehensibilem,  intellectu  ac 
voluntate  omnique  perfectione 
infinitum  j  qui  cion  sit  una  sin- 
gular is,  simjplex  omnino  et  in- 
commutahilis  substantia  spiritu- 
alise jprmdicandus  est  re  et  essen- 
tia a  munio  distinctus,  in  se  et 
ex  se  heatissimits,  et  super  omnia, 
qu(B  proiter  ipsum  sunt  et  con- 
cipi possunt,  ineffdbillter  excelsus. 

Hie  solus  verus  Deus  honitate 
sua  et  omnipotenti  virtute  non 
ad  augendam  suam  heatitudi- 
nem,  nee  ad  acquirendani,  sed  ad 
manifestandam  perfectioneni  su- 
am per  bona,  qucB  crcaturis  im- 
pertitur,  liherrimo  consilio  si- 
mul  ah  initio  temporis  utram- 
que  de  niliilo  condidit  creatu- 
ram,  spiritualem  et  coiporalem, 
angelieam  videlicet  et  munda- 
nam,  ac  deinde  hu7nanani  quasi 
communem  ex  spiritu  et  corpore 
constitutam. 

Universa  vero,  quce  condidit, 
Deus  procidentia  sua  tuetur  at- 
que    gubernat,   attingens    a  Sne 


Chapter  I. 

Of  God,  the  Creator  of  all  Things. 

The  holy  Catholic  Apostolic  Ro- 
man Cluirch  believes  and  confesses 
that  there  is  one  true  and  livinsr 
God,  Creator  and  Lord  of  heaven 
and  earth,  almighty,  eternal,  im- 
mense, incomprehensi])le,  infinite 
in  intelligence,  in  will,  and  in  all 
perfection,  who,  as  being  one,  sole, 
absolutely  simple  and  immutable 
spiritual  substance,  is  to  be  de- 
clared as  really  and  essentially  dis- 
tinct from  the  world,  of  supreme 
beatitude  in  and  from  himself,  and 
ineffably  exalted  above  all  things 
which  exist,  or  ai-e  conceivable,  ex- 
cept himself. 

This  one  only  true  God,  of  his 
own  goodness  and  almighty  powder, 
not  for  the  increase  or  acquirement 

,  of  his  own  happiness,  but  to  mani- 
fest his  perfection  by  the  blessings 
which  he  bestows  on  creatures,  and 
with  absolute  freedom  of  counsel, 
created  put  of  nothing,  from  the 
very  first  beginning  of  time,  both 
the  spiritual  and  the  corporeal  creat- 
ure, to  wit,  the  angelical  and  the 
mundane,  and  afterwards  the  hu- 
man creature,  as  partaking,  in  a 
sense,  of  botli,  consisting  of  spirit 
and  of  body. 

God  protects  and  governs  by  his 
providence  all  things  which  he  hath 

J  made,  ^reaching  from  end  to  end 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL^ 


137 


usque  ad  finem  foHitei\  et  dis- 
jponens  omnia  siiaviter.  Omnia 
enim  nuda  et  a^erta  sunt  oculis 
ejuSj  ea  etiam,  quot  libera  crea- 
turarum  actione  futura  sunt. 

Caput  II. 
De  Revelatione. 

Eadem  sancta  mater  Ecclesia 
tenet  et  docet,  Deum,  reriiin  om- 
nium princijpium  et  finem ^  na- 
turali  humanoe  rationis  luniine 
e  rebus  creatis  certo  cognosci 
posse;  invisibilia  enim  ipsius, 
a  creatura  onundi,  jper  ea  quoe 
facta  siint^  intellecta,  conspici- 
untur :  attamen  jplacuisse  ejus 
sapientice  et  honitati,  alia,  eaque 
sujpernaturali  via  se  ijpsum  ac 
ceterna  voluntatis  siice  decreta 
hutnano  generi  revelare,  dlcente 
Ajpostolo  :  Midtifariam,  onidtis- 
que  tnodis  olim  Deus  loquens 
jpatribus  in  Projphetis :  novis- 
sirne,  diebus  istis  locutus  est  no- 
bis in  Filio. 

IIuiG  divincE  revelationi  tri- 
buendum  quidem  est,  ut  ea,  quoe 
in  rebus  divinis  humance  ratio- 
ni  per  se  hnpervia  non  s-unt,  in 
prccsenti  quoque  generis  humani 
conditione  ab  omnibus  expedite, 
finna  certitudine  et  nullo  ad- 
mixto    errore    cognosci    possint. 


mightily,  and  ordering  all  things 
sweetly.'^  For  '  all  things  are  bare 
and  open  to  his  eyes/^  even  those 
wliicli  are  yet  to  be  by  the  free 
action  of  creatures. 

Chapter  II. 
0/  Revelation. 

The  same  holy  Mother  Church 
holds  and  teaches  that  God,  the  be- 
ginning and  end  of  all  things,  may 
be  certainly  known  by  the  natural 
light  of  human  reason,  by  means  of 
created  things;  'for  the  invisible 
things  of  him  from  the  creation  of 
the  world  are  clearly  seen,  being 
understood  by  the  things  that  are 
made,'  ^  but  that  it  pleased  his  wis- 
dom and  bounty,  to  reveal  himself, 
and  the  eternal  decrees  of  his  will, 
to  mankind  by  another  and  a  super- 
natural way :  as  the  Apostle  says, 
'  God,  having  spoken  on  divers  oc- 
casions, and  many  ways,  in  times 
past,  to  the  Fathers  by  the  Prophets ; 
last  of  all,  in  these  ciays,  hath  spoken 
to  us  by  his  Son.'* 

It  is  to  be  ascribed  to  this  divine 
revelation,  that  such  truths  among 
thincjs  divine  as  of  themselves  are 
not  beyond  human  reason,  can, 
even  in  the  present  condition  of 
mankind,  be  known  by  every  one 
witli  facility,  with  firm  assurance, 
and  with  no  admixture  of  error. 


*  Wisd.  viii.  1. 


2  Heb.  iv.  13. 


Kom.  i.  20. 


*  Heb.  i.  1,2. 


138 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


Non  hac  tamen  de  causa  revela- 
tlo  absolute  necessaria  dicenda 
est,  sed  quia  Deus  ex  infinita 
honitate  sua  ordinavit  hominem 
ad  finem  sujpernaturaletn,  ad 
jpartici^anda  scilicet  bona  divi- 
7ia,  quae  humaiice  mentis  intelli- 
(jentiam  omnino  sujperant ;  si- 
quidem  oculus  non  vidit,  nee 
auris  avdivit,  nee  in  cor  homi- 
nis  ascendit,  quoe  jprc^jparavit 
Deus  iis,  qui  diligunt  ilium. 

Ilcec  porro  supernaturalis  re- 
velatioy  secundum  universalis  Ec- 
clesice  fidem,  a  sancta  Triden-. 
tlna  Synodo  declaratam,  conti- 
netur  in  libris  scriptis  et  sine 
scrij^to  traditionihus,  quce  ip- 
sius  Christi  ore  ah  Apostolis 
acceptcB^  aut  db  ipsis  Apostolis 
Spiritu  Sancto  dictante  quasi 
jper  manus  tradita\  ad  nos  us- 
que pervenerunt.  Qui  quidem 
veteris  et  Novi  Testamenti  libri 
integri  curri  omnibus  suis  jpar- 
tlbus,  prout  in  ejusdem  Concilii 
decreto  recensentur,  et  in  veteri 
vulgata  latina  editione  habentur. 
pro  sacris  et  canonicis  suscipi- 
endi  sunt.  Eos  vero  Ecclesia 
pro  sacris  et  canonicis  habet, 
non  ideo,  quod  sola  humana 
industria  concinnati,  sua  deinde 


This,  however,  is  not  the  reason  why 
revelation  is  to  be  called  absolutely 
necessary;  but  because  God  of  his 
infinite  goodness  has  ordained  man 
to  a  supernatural  end,  viz.,  to  be  a 
sharer  of  divine  blessings,  which 
utterly  exceed  the  intelligence  of 
the  human  mind ;  for '  eye  hath  not 
seen,  nor  ear  heard,  neither  hath  it 
entered  into  tlie  heart  of  man,  what 
things  God  hath  prepared  for  them 
that  love  him.'  ^ 

Further,  this  supernatural  reve- 
lation, according  to  the  universal 
belief  of  the  Church,  declared  by 
the  sacred  Synod  of  Trent,  is  con- 
tained in  the  WTitten  books  and  un- 
written traditions  which  have  come 
down  to  us,  having  been  received 
by  the  Apostles  from  the  mouth  of 
Christ  himself;  or  from  the  Apos- 
tles themselves,  by  the  dictation  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  have  been  trans- 
mitted, as  it  were,  from  hand  to 
hand.2  And  these  books  of  the  Old 
and  New  Testament  are  to  be  re- 
ceived as  sacred  and  canonical,  in 
their  integrity,  with  all  their  parts, 
as  they  are  enumerated  in  the  de- 
cree of  the  said  Council,  and  are 
contained  in  the  ancient  Latin  edi- 
tion of  the  Yulgate.  These  the 
Church   holds  to   be   sacred   and 


»  I  Cor.  ii.  0. 

'  Canons  and  Decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  Session  the  Fourth.  Decree  concerning  the 
Canonical  Scriptures. 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


139 


auctoritate  sint  ajpjprobati ;  nee 
ideo  dumtaxat,  quod  revelatio- 
7iem  sine  errore  contineant,  sed 
jyrojHerea,  qitod  Sjpivitu  Sancto 
insj)irante  conscrijpti  Deum  ha- 
hent  auctorem,  atqiie  %it  tales 
ijpsi  EcclesicB  traditi  sunt. 


Quoniam  "oero^  qiiCB  sancta 
Tridentina  Synodus  de  inter- 
jpretatione  divince  ScrvpturcB  ad 
coercenda  jpetulantia  ingenia  sa- 
lubriter  deorevit^  a  qicibitsdam 
hominihus  jprave  expo7iuntur, 
nos,  idem  decretum  renovantes, 
hanc  illius  mentem  esse  declara- 
Quus,  ut  in  rebus  fidei  et  mo- 
Tum^  ad  cedificationem  doctrincB 
ChristianoB  pertinentiiim,  is  jpro 
i^ero  sensio  sacroe  Scri/ptiiroe.  ha- 
bendus  sit,  quern  tenuit  ao  tenet 
sancta  mater  Ecclesia,  ciijus  est 
judicare  de  vero  sensu  et  inter- 
jpretatione  Scrij)turaruin  sancta- 
rum;  atqiie  ideo  nemiiii  licere 
contra  hunc  sen  sum  aut  etiam 
contra  unaniniem  consensuni  Pa- 
trum  ipsam  Scripturam  sacram 
interjpretavL 

Caput  III. 
De  Fide. 

Quum  homo  a  Deo  tamqicam 
Creatore    et   Domino    suo    totus 


canonical,  not  because,  having  been 
carefully  composed  by  mere  human 
industry,  they  were  afterwards  ap- 
proved by  her  authority,  nor  merely 
because  they  contain  revelation,with 
no  admixture  of  error;  but  because, 
having  been  written  by  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  Holy  Ghost,  they  have  God 
for  their  author,  and  have  been  de- 
livered as  such  to  the  Church  herself. 
And  as  the  things  which  the  holy 
Synod  of  Trent  decreed  for  the  good 
of  souls  concerning  the  interpreta- 
tion of  Divine  Scripture,  in  order 
to  curb  rebellious  spirits,  have  been 
wrongly  explained  by  some,  we,  re- 
newing the  said  decree,  declare  this 
to  be  their  sense,  that,  in  matters  of 
faith  and  morals,  appertaining  to 
the  building  up  of  Christian  doc- 
trine, that  is  to  be  held  as  the  true 
sense  of  Holy  Scripture  wliich  our 
holy  Mother  Church  liath  held  and 
holds,  to  whom  it  belongs  to  judge 
of  the  true  sense  and  interpreta- 
tion of  the  Holy  Scripture;  and 
therefore  that  it  is  permitted  to  no 
one  to  interpret  tlie Sacred  Scripture 
contrary  to  this  sense,  nor,  likewise, 
contrary  to  the  unanimous  consent 
of  the  Fathers. 

Chapter  III. 
On  Faith. 

Man   being    wholly   dependent 
upon  God,  as  upon  his  Creator  and 


140 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


depciideat,  et  ratio  creata  incre- 
atce  veritati  penitus  suhjecta  sit, 
jplenum  revelanti  Deo  intellec- 
tus  et  voluntatis  ohsequium  fide 
jproestare  tenemur.  Hanc  vero 
fidern,  quce  humance,  sahitis  ini- 
tium  est,  Ecdesia  CatJiolica  jpro- 
fitetuT,  virtutem  esse  sujpernatu- 
ralem,  qua,  Dei  asjpirante  et  ad- 
juvante  gratia,  ah  eo  revelata 
vera  esse  (yredimus,  non  j)rojpter 
intrinsecam  rerimi  veritatem  na- 
turali  rationis  lumine  joersjpec- 
tam,  sed  jprojpter  auctoritatem 
ijpsius  Dei  revelaiitis,  qui  nee 
falli  nee  fallere  jpotest.  Est 
enim  fides,  testante  Ajpostolo, 
sperandaruin  sicbstantia  rerum, 
argumentum  non  ajpjyarentium. 


Ut  nihilominus  fidei  nostrcE 
ohsequium  rationi  consentaneum 
esset,  voluit  Dens  cum  internis 
Spiritus  Sancti  auxiliis  externa 
jungi  revelationis  sum  argu- 
menta,  facta  scilicet  divina,  at- 
que  imprimis  miracula  et  pro- 
phetias,  quce  cum  Dei  omnipo- 
tentiam  et  infinitam  scientiam 
lucideiiter  commonstrent,  divince 
revelationis  signa  sunt  certissi- 
ina  et  omnium  intelligentioe 
accommodata.  Quare  turn  Moy- 
ses  et  Prophetce,  turn   ipse   ma- 


Lord,  and  created  reason  being  ab- 
solutely subject  to  uncreated  truth, 
we  are  bound  to  yield  to  God,  by 
faith  in  his' revelation,  the  full  obe- 
dience of  our  intelligence  and  wilL 
And  the  Catholic  Church  teaches 
that  this  faith,  which  is  the  begin- 
ning of  man's  salvation,  is  a  super- 
natural virtue,  whereby,  inspired 
and  assisted  by  the  grace  of  God, 
we  believe  that  the  things  which 
he  has  revealed  are  true;  not  be- 
cause of  the  intrinsic  truth  of  the 
tilings,  viewed  by  the  natural  liglit 
of  reason,  but  because  of  the  au- 
thority of  God  himself,  who  reveals 
them,  and  who  can  neither  be  de- 
ceived nor  deceive.  For  faith,  as 
the  Apostle  testifies,  is  'the  sub- 
stance of  things  hoped  for,  the  con- 
viction of  things  that  appear  not.'^ 
Nevertheless,  in  oider  that  tlie 
obedience  of  our  faith  might  be  in 
harmony  with  reason,  God  willed 
that  to  the  interior  help  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  there  should  be  joined  exte- 
rior proofs  of  his  revelation;  to 
wit,  divine  facts,  and  especially 
miracles  and  prophecies,  which,  as 
they  manifestly  display  the  omnip- 
otence and  infinite  knowledge  of 
God,  are  most  certain  proofs  of  his 
divine  revelation,  adapted  to  the 
intelligence  of  all  men.  Wherefore, 
both  Moses  and  the  Pi-ophets,  and, 


»IIeb.i.  11. 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


141 


xlme  Christus  Dominus  multa 
et  manifestissima  miracula  et 
2)rojphetias  edidevunt;  et  de 
Ajpostolis  legimus :  llli  autem 
^rofecti  ^rcedicaverunt  ubique^ 
Domino  coojperante  et  sermo- 
nem  confirmante  sequentibics  si- 
gnis.  Et  rurswm  scrljotum  est : 
Ilabemus  firmiorem  jprojpheticum 
sermonem^  cui  bene  facitis  at- 
tendentes  quasi  lucernce  lucenti 
in  caliginoso  loco. 

Licet  autem  fidei  assensus  ne- 
qiio.qxiam  sit  mottcs  animi  cob- 
cus :  nemo  tamen  evangeliccB 
jprmdicationi  consentire  jpotest^ 
sicut  ojportet  ad  salutem,  conse- 
qtiendqm,  absque  illuminatione 
et  insjpiratione  Sjpiritus  Sanctis 
qui  dat  omnibus  suavitatem  in 
consentiendo  et  credendo  veri- 
tati.  Quare  fides  ijpsa  i7i  se, 
etiamsi  jper  caritatem  non  ojpe- 
retur^  donum  Dei  est,  et  actus 
ejus  est  opus  ad  salutem  jperti- 
nens,  quo  homo  liberam  jprmstat 
i/psi  Deo  obedientiam,  gratim 
ejus,  cui  resistere  jposset,  consen- 
tiendo et  coojperando. 

Porro  fide  divina  et  Catho- 
lica  ea  omnia  credenda  sunt, 
quoe  in  verbo  Dei  scripto  'vel 
tradito   continent ur,  et  ab  EcqIc- 


most  especially,  Christ  our  Lord 
himself,  showed  forth  many  and 
most  evident  miracles  and  prophe- 
cies ;  and  of  the  Apostles  we  read  : 
'But  they  going  forth  preached 
every  where,  the  Lord  working  with- 
al, and  confirming  the  word  with 
signs  that  followed.'^  And  again, 
it  is  written :  '  We  have  the  more 
firm  prophetical  word,  whereunto 
you  do  well  to  attend,  as  to  a  light 
shining  in  a  dark  place.'  ^ 

But  though  the  assent  of  faith  is 
by  no  means  a  blind  action  of  the 
mind,  still  no  man  can  assent  to 
the  Gospel  teaching,  as  is  necessary 
to  obtain  salvation,  without  the  il- 
lumination and  inspiration  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  who  gives  to  all  men 
sweetness  in  assenting  to  and  believ- 
ing in  the  truth.^  Wherefore,  faith 
itself,  even  when  it  does  not  work 
by  charity,  is  in  itself  a  gift  of  God, 
and  the  act  of  faith  is  a  work  ap- 
pertaining to  salvation,  by  which 
man  yields  voluntary  obedience  to 
God  himself,  by  assenting  to  and 
co-operating  with  his  grace,  which 
he  is  able  to  resist. 

Further,  all  those  things  are  to 
be  believed  with  divine  and  Catho- 
lic faith  which  are  contained  in  the 
Word  of  God,  written  or  handed 


iMarkxvi.  20.  »  2  Peter  i.  19. 

3  Canons  of  the  Second  Council  of  Orange,  confirmed  by  Pope  Boniface  II.,  A.D.  529, 
against  the  SemipelagianSj  Canon  VII.  See  Denzinger's  Enchiridion  Si/mbolorvm^  p.  53 
CWiirzburg,  1865). 


142 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


sia  sive  solemni  judicio  sive 
ordinario  et  iiniversali  magis- 
tet'io  tamqxiam  divinitus  reve- 
lata  credenda  ^roponuntur. 

Quoniain  vero  sine  fide  im- 
possibile  est  placere  Deo,  et  ad 
filiorutifh  ejus  consortium  joerve- 
nire  j  ideo  nemini  unquam  sine 
ilia  contigit  justification  nee  ul- 
lus,  nisi  in  ea  perseveraverit 
bisque  in  finem,  mtam  ceternam 
asseguetur.  Ut  autem  officio  ve- 
ram  fidem  amplectendi,  in  eague 
constanter  jperseverandi  satisfa- 
cere  j^ossemus,  Deiis  jper  Filiuni 
suum  unigenitum  Ecclesiam  in- 
stituit,  suceque  institutio7iis  ma- 
nifestis  notis  instruxit,  %it  ea 
tamquam  custos  et  magistra  ver- 
hi  revelati  ah  omnibus  posset 
agnosci.  Ad  solam  enim  Catho- 
licam  Ecclesiam  ea  pertinent 
omnia,  quce  ad  evidentem  fidei 
Christiance  credihilitatem  tam 
multa  et  tam  mira  divinitus 
sunt  disposita.  Quin  etiam  Ec- 
clesia  per  se  ipsa,  oh  suam  nempe 
admirahilem  propagationem,  exi- 
miam.  sanctitatem  et  inexhaustam 
in  omnihus  honis  foecunditatem, 
oh  Catholicam  unitatem^  invictam- 
que  stahilitatem,  magnum  quod- 
dam  et  perpetiium  est  motivum 
credihilitatis  et  divince  suce  lega- 
tionis  testimonium  ivTefragdbile. 


down,  and  which  the  Church,  either 
by  a  solemn  judgment,  or  by  her 
ordinary  and  univei-sal  magisteri- 
um,  proposes  for  belief  as  having 
been  divinely  revealed. 

And  since,  without  faith,  it  is 
impossible  to  please  God,  and  to 
attain  to  the  fellowship  of  his  chil- 
dren, therefore  without  faith  no  one 
has  ever  attained  justification,  nor 
will  any  one  obtain  eternal  life 
unless  he  shall  have  persevered  in 
faith  unto  the  end.  And,  that  we 
may  be  able  to  satisfy  the  obliga- 
tion of  embracing  the  true  faith, 
and  of  constantly  persevering  in 
it,  God  has  instituted  the  Church 
through  his  only-begotten  Son,  and 
has  bestowed  on  it  manifest  notes 
of  that  institution,  that  it  may  be 
recognized  by  all  men  as  the  guard- 
ian and  teacher  of  the  revealed 
Word ;  for  to  the  Catholic  Church 
alone  belong  all  those  many  and 
admirable  tokens  which  have  been 
divinely  established  for  the  evident 
credibility  of  the  Christian  faith. 
Nay,  more,  the  Church  by  itself, 
with  its  marvelous  extension,  its 
eminent  holiness,  and  its  inexhaust- 
ible fruitfulness  in  every  good 
thing,  with  its  Catholic  unity  and 
its  invincible  stability,  is  a  great 
and  perpetual  motive  of  credibilitj^,  • 
and  an  irrefutable  witness  of  its 
own  divine  mission. 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


143 


Quo  fit^  ut  ipsa  veluti  si- 
gnum  levatum  in  nationes^  et 
ad  se  invitet,  qui  nonditm  credi- 
derunt,  et  filios  suos  certiores 
faciat,  firmissimo  niti  funda- 
mento  fidem^  quam  jpvofitentur. 
Qui  quidern  testimonio  efficax 
suhsidium  accedit  ex  sux^erna 
virtute.  Eteniin  henignissiinus 
Dominus  et  crrantes  gratia  sua 
excitat  atque  adjuvat,  ut  ad  ag- 
nitio7iem  veritatis  venire  jpos- 
sint^  et  eoSy  quos  de  tenebris 
transtulit  in  admirabile  lumen 
suwn,  in  hoc  eodem  lumine  ut 
perseverent,  gratia  sua  confir- 
mat,  non  deserens,  nisi  desera- 
tur.  Quoeirca  minime  par  est 
conditio  eorum,  qui  per  cceleste 
fidei  donum  CatholiccB  veritati  ad- 
hceserunt^  atque  eorum^  qui  ducti 
opinionihus  humanis,  falsam  re- 
ligionem  sectantur;  illi  enim,  qui 
fidem  sub  Ecclesice  magisterio  sus- 
ceperunt^  nullam  unquam  habere 
possunt  justarn  causam  'mutandis 
aut  in  dubium  fidem  eamdem  re- 
vocandi.  Quae,  cum  ita  sint,  gra- 
tias  agent es  Deo  PatH,  qui  dignos 
nos  fecit  in  partem  sortis  sancto- 
rum in  lumine^  tantam  ne  negli- 
gamus  salutem,  sed  aspicientes  in 
auctorem  fidei  et  consummatorem 
Jesum,  teneamus  spei  nostrce  con- 
fessionem  indeclinabilem. 


And  thus,  like  a  standard  set  up  a 
unto  the  nations,^  it  both  invites  to  \ 
itself  those  who  do  not  yet  believe, 
and  assures  its  children  that  the 
faith  which  they  profess  rests  on 
the  most  firm  foundation.  And  its 
testimony  is  efficaciously  supported 
by  a  power  from  on  high.  For  our 
most  merciful  Lord  gives  his  grace 
to  stir  up  and  to  aid  those  who  are 
astray,  that  they  may  come  to  a 
knowledge  of  the  truth;  and  to 
those  wliom  he  has  brought  out  of 
darkness  into  his  own  admirable 
light  he  gives  his  grace  to  strength- 
en them  to  persevere  in  that  light, 
deserting  none  who  desert  not  him. 
Therefore  there  is  no  parity  be- 
tween the  condition  of  those  who 
have  adhered  to  the  Catholic  truth 
by  the  heavenly  gift  of  faith,  and 
of  those  who,  led  by  human  opin- 
ions, follow  a  false  reb'gion ;  for 
those  who  have  received  the  faith 
under  the  magisterium  of  the 
Church  can  never  have  any  just 
cause  for  changing  or  doubting  that 
faith.  Therefore,  giving  thanks  to 
God  the  Father  who  has  made  us 
worthy  to  be  partakers  of  the  lot  of 
the  Saints  in  light,  let  us  not  neglect 
so  great  salvation,  but  with  our  eyes 
fixed  on  Jesus,  the  author  and  finisher 
of  our  f  aith,letus  hold  fast  the  confes- 
sion of  our  hope  without  wavering.^ 


*  Isaiah  xi.  12. 


»  Heb.  xii.  2,  and  x.  23. 


144 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


Caput  IV. 
s  ,    .  De  Fide  et  Ratione. 

Hoc  quoque  ^erjpetuus  Eccle- 
sice  Catholicce  consensus  tenuit  et 
tenet,  duplicem  esse  ordinem  co- 
gnitionis,  non  solum-  princij^io, 
sed  ohjecto  etiam  distinctum : 
^rincipio  quidem,  quia  in  alter o 
naturali  ratione,  in  altero  fide 
divina  cognoscimus j  ohjecto  au- 
tem,  quia  jprcBter  ea,  ad  quoe  na- 
turalis  ratio  jpertingere  jootest, 
credenda  nobis  jprojponuntwr  my- 
steria  in  Deo  alscondita,  quoe, 
nisi  revelata  divinities,  innote- 
scere  non  jpossunt.  Quocirca 
Ajpostolus,  qui  a  gentihus  Deum 
jper  ea,  quoe  facta  sunt,  cogni- 
tuin  esse  testatur,  disserens  ta- 
Qnen  de  gratia  et  veritate,  qitoe 
Jper  Jesum  Christum  facta  est, 
^ronunciat :  Loquimur  Dei  sa- 
jpientiam  in  mysterio,  quoa  db- 
scondita  est,  quam  jprcedestinavit 
Deus  ante  scxcula  in  gloriam 
nostram,  quam  nemo  principimn 
hujus  scECuli  cognovit :  nobis  au- 
tem  revelavit  Deu$  jper  Spiritum 
suum :  Sjpiritus  enim  omnia 
scrutatur,  etiam.  jprofunda  Dei. 
Et  ijpse  Unigenitus  confitetxir 
Patri,  quia  ahscondit  hcec  a  sa- 
jpieritibus  et  jprxidentibus,  et  re- 
velavit ea  jparvulis. 
*Ac  ratio  quidera,fide  illustrata, 


Chapter  IV. 
On  Faith  and  Reason. 

The  Catholic  Church,  with  one 
consent,  has  also  ever  held  and  does 
hold  that  there  is  a  twofold  order 
of  knowledge  distinct  both  in  prin- 
ciple and  also  in  object;  in  princig 
pie,  because  our  knowledge  in  the 
one  is  by  natural  reason,  and  in  the 
other  by  divine  faith;  in  object, 
because,  besides  those  tilings  to 
which  natural  reason  can  attain, 
there  are  proposed  to  our  belief 
mysteries  hidden  in  God,  which, 
unless  divinely  revealed,  can  not 
be  known.  Wherefore,  the  Apos- 
tle, who  testifies  that  God  is  known 
by  the  Gentiles  through  created 
things,  still,  when  discoursing  of 
the  grace  and  truth  which  come  by 
Jesus  Christ,^  says :  '  We  speak  the 
wisdom  of  God  in  a  mystery,  a  wis- 
dom wliich  is  hidden,  which  God 
ordained  before  the  world  unto  our 
glory ;  which  none  of  the  princes  of 
this  world  knew  .  .  .  but  to  us  God 
hath  revealed  them  by  his  Spirit. 
For  the  Spirit  searcheth  all  things, 
yea,  the  deep  things  of  God.'^  And 
the  only-begotten  Son  himself  gives 
thanks  to  the  Father,  because  he  has 
hid  these  things  from  the  vvise  and 
prudent,  and  has  revealed  them  to 
little  ones.^ 

Reason,  indeed,  enlightened  by 


»  John  i.  17, 


« 1  Cor.  ii.  7-9. 


5  Matt.  xi.  25. 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


145 


cum  sedido,  pie  et  sobrie  quce- 
rit,  aliquam,  Deo  dante,  myste- 
riorum  intelligentiam  eamque 
fructuosissimam  assequitur,  twn 
ex  eorum^  qicce  naturaliter  cogno- 
scit,  analogiay  turn  e  mysterio- 
rum  ipsoritm  nexu  inter  se  et 
cum  fine  hominis  ultimo ;  nun- 
guam  tamen  idonea  redditur 
ad  ea  jperspicieiida  instar  veri- 
tatum,  quce  jpropTium  ijpsius 
ohjectum  constituunt.  Divina 
enim.  mysteria  suajpte  natura 
intellectum  creatum  sic  exce- 
dant,  ut  etiam  revelatione  tra- 
dita  et  fide  suscepta,  ipsius 
tamen  fidei  velamine  contecta  et 
quadam  quasi  caligine  dbvoluta 
tnaneant,  quamdiu  in  hac  mor- 
tali  vita  jperegrinamur  a  Domi- 
no :  per  fidem  enitn  ambula- 
raus^  et  non  per  speciem. 

Verum  etsi  fides  sit  supra 
rationem^  nulla  tamen  unquam 
inter  fidem  et  rationem  vera  dis- 
sensio  esse  potest :  cum  idem 
Deiis,  qui  mysteria  revelat  et 
fidem  infimdit,  animo  humano 
rationis  lumen  indiderit;  Deus 
autem  negare  seipsum  non  pos- 
sit,  nee  verum  vero  unquam  con- 
tradicere.  Inanis  autem  hujus 
contradictionis  species  inde  po- 
tissimum  oritur,  quod  vel  fidei 


f  aitli,  when  it  seeks  earnestly,  pious- 
ly, and  calmly,  attains  by  a  gift 
from  God  some,  and  that  a  very 
fruitful,  understanding  of  myster- 
ies; partly  from  the  analogy  of 
those  things  which  it  naturally 
knows,  partly  from  the  relations 
which  the  mysteries  bear  to  one 
another  and  to  the  last  end  of  man ; 
but  reason  never  becomes  capable 
of  apprehending  mysteries  as  it 
does  those  truths  which  constitute 
its  proper  object.  For  the  divine 
mysteries  by  their  own  nature  so 
far  transcend  the  created  intelli- 
gence that,  even  when  delivered 
by  revelation  and  received  by  faith, 
they  remain  covered  with  the  veil 
of  faith  itself,  and  shrouded  in  a 
certain  degree  of  darkness,  so  long 
as  we  are  pilgrims  in  this  mortal 
life,  not  yet  with  God;  ^for  we 
walk  by  faith  and  not  by  sight.'  ^ 

But  although  faith  is  above  rea- 
son, there  can  never  be  any  real 
discrepancy  between  faith  and  rea- 
son, since  the  same  God  who  re- 
veals mysteries  and  infuses  faith 
has  bestowed  the  light  of  reason  on 
the  human  mind ;  and  God  can  noj 
deny  himself,  nor  can  truth  ever 
contradict  truth.  The  false  ap- 
pearance of  such  a  contradiction  is 
mainly  due,  either  to  the  dogmas 
of  faith  not  having  been  understood 


*  2  Cor.  V.  7. 
K 


146 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


dogmata  ad  inienterri  EcclesicE 
ihtellecta  et  exjposita  non  fae- 
rint,  vel  qpinionum  commenia 
pro  rationis  effatis  habeantur. 
Oninem  igitur  assertionem  veri- 
tati  illwninatcB  jidei  contrariam 
omnino  falsam  esse  definimus. 
Porro  Ecclesia,  qiice  una  cuvi 
ajpostolico  inunere  docendi,  man- 
datum  accejpit  fidei  dejpositum 
custodiendi,  jus  etiain  et  offici- 
um  divinitus  habet  falsi  7i07ni- 
nis  scientiam  jprosorihendl^  ne 
quis  decipiatur  per  philosophi- 
am  et  inanem,  fallaciam^.  Qua- 
propter  omnes  Cliristiani  fideles 
hitjusmodi  opiniones^  qucQ  jidei 
doctrinoi  contraries  esse  cogno- 
sciintur,  maxim e  si  ah  Ecclesia 
reprohatcE  fuerint,  non  solum 
prohihentur  tanquam  legitimas 
scientice  conclusiones  dfendere^ 
sed  pro  errorihus  potius,  qui 
fallacem  veritatis  speciem  prce  se 
fera?it,  habere  tenentur  omnino. 

Neque  solum  fides  et  ratio  in- 
ter se  dissidere  nunquam  pos- 
sunt,  sed  opem,  quoque  sibi  mu- 
tuam  ferunt,  cum  recta  ratio 
^fldei  fandamenta  ■demonstret, 
ejusque  lumine  illustrata  rerum 
dimnarum  scientiam  excolat ; 
fides  vero  rationem  ah  errorihus 


and  expounded  according  to  the 
mind  of  the  Church,  or  to  the  in- 
ventions of  opinion  having  been 
taken  for  the  verdicts  of  reason. 
We  define,  therefore,  tliat  every 
assertion  contrary  to  a  truth  of  en- 
lightened faith  is  utterly  false.^ 
Further,  the  Church,  which,  to- 
gether with  the  Apostolic  office  of 
teaching,  has  received  a  charge  to 
guard  the  deposit  of  faith,  derives 
from  God  the  right  and  the  duty 
of  proscribing  false  science,  lest 
any  should  be  deceived  by  jDliiloso- 
phy  and  vain  fallacy .^  Therefore 
all  faithful  Christians  are  not  only 
forbidden  to  defend,  as  legitimate 
conclusions  of  science,  such  opin- 
ions as  are  known  to  be  contrary  to  . 
the  doctrines  of  faith,  especially  if  ' 
they  have  been  condemned  by  the  ' 
Church,  but  are  altogether  bound 
to  account  them  as  errors  which 
put  on  the  fallacious  appearance 
of  truth. 

And  not  only  can  faith  and  rea- 
son never  be  opposed  to  one  an- 
other, but  they  are  of  mutual  aid 
one  to  the  other;  for  right  reason 
demonstrates  the  foundations  of 
faith,  and,  enlightened  by  its  light, 
cultivates  the  science  of  things  di- 
vine ;  while  faith  frees  and  guards 


*  From  the  Bull  of  Pope  Leo  X.,  Apostolici  regiminis,  read  in  the  Eiglith  Session  of  the 
Fifth  Lateran  Council,  A.D.  1513.     See  Labbe's  Councils,  Vol.  XIX.  p.  842  (Venice,  1732). 
'  Coloss.  ii.  8. 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


147 


liheret  ac  tueatur^  eamque  mul- 
tipUci  cognitione  instruat.  Qua- 
jorojjter  tantum  abest^  ut  Eccle- 
sia  humanarum  artrnm  et  disci- 
jplinarum  cuUutcb  obsistat,  ut 
hano  midtis  modis  juvet  atqiie 
jpromoveat.  Non  enini  commo- 
da  ah  iis  ad  hominum  mtarn 
dimanantia  aut  ignorat  aut  de- 
sjoicit ;  fatetur  imo,  eas,  que- 
madmodum  a  Deo,  scientiarum 
Domino,  jprofectm  sunt,  ita  si 
rite  jpertractentur,  ad  Deum,  ju- 
vante  ejus  gratia,  jpcrducere. 
Neo  sane  ijpsa  vetat,  ne  hujus- 
modi  discijplinoe  in  suo  qucBgue 
ambit  u  jprojpriis  tttanticr  jprind- 
jpiis  et  jpro^ria  'inethodo ;  sed 
justam  hano  libertatem.  agno- 
scens,  id  sedulo  cavet,  ne  divincB 
doctrince  rejpugnando  errores  in 
se  suscijpiant,  aut  fines  ^TOjprios 
transgressce,  ea,  quce  sunt  fidei, 
occujpent  et  jperturbent. 

Neque  enim  fidei  doctrina, 
quam  Deus  revelavit,  velut  jpJii- 
losojphicwn  inventum  jorojposita 
est  humanis  ingeniis  jperficienda, 
sed  tanquam  divinum  dejposi- 
turn  Christi  Sponsce  tradita,  fide- 
liter  custodienda  et  infallibiliter 
declaranda.  Ilinc  sacroruni  quo- 
que  dogmatum  is  sensus  jperjpe- 
tuo  est  retinendus,  quern  semel 
declaravit  sancta  mater  Eccle- 
sia,    nee   unquam    ab    eo    sensu, 


reason  from  errors,  and  furnishes 
it  with  manifold  knowledge.  So 
far,  therefore,  is  the  Church  from 
opposing  the  cultivation  of  hnnian 
arts  and  sciences,  that  it  in  many 
ways  helps  and  promotes  it.  For 
the  Church  neither  ignores  nor  de- 
spises the  benefits  of  human  life 
which  result  from  the  arts  and  sci- 
ences, but  confesses  that,  as  they 
came  from  God,  the  Lord  of  all 
science,  so,  if  they  be  rightly  used, 
they  lead  to  God  by  the  help  of  his 
grace.  Nor  does  the  Church  for- 
bid that  each  of  these  sciences  in  its 
sphere  should  make  use  of  its  own 
principles  and  its  own  method ;  but, 
while  recognizing  this  just  liberty, 
it  stands  watchfully  on  guard,  lest 
sciences,  setting  themselves  against 
the  divine  teaching,  or  trans- 
gressing their  own  limits,  should 
invade  and  disturb  the  domain  of 
faith. 

For  the  doctrine  of  faith  which 
God  hath  revealed  has  not  been 
proposed,  like  a  philosophical  in- 
vention, to  be  perfected  by  human 
ingenuity,  but  has  been  delivered 
as  a  divine  deposit  to  the  Spouse  ^ 
of  Christ,  to  be  faithfully  kept  and 
infallibly  declared.  Hence,  also, 
that  meaning  of  the  sacred  dogmas 
is  perpetually  to  be  retained  which 
our  holy  motlier  the  Church  has 
once  declared ;  nor  is  that  meaning 


148 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


altioris  intelligenticB  specie  et 
nomine^  reeedendum.  Crescat 
igitur  et  multum  vehementerque 
jprqficiat,  tarn  singidoriim,  qxiam 
omnium^  tain  unius  hominis, 
quam  totius  Ecclesioe,  cetatem  ac 
scecidorum  gradihus,  intelligen-  \ 
tia,  scientia,  sapientia ;  sed  in 
suo  dumtaxat  genere,  in  eodem 
scilicet  dogmate,  eodem  sensu, 
eademgiie  sententia. 


Canones. 
I. 

De  Deo  rerum  omnium  Cr eater e. 

1.  Si  qiiis  unum  verwn  Deum 
msibiliinn  et  invisihilium  Crea- 
torem  et  Dominum  negaverit : 
anathema  sit. 

2.  Si  quis  prceter  materiam 
nihil  esse  affirmare  non  erubue- 
rit :  anathema  sit. 

3.  Si  quis  dixerit^  unam  ean- 
demque  esse  Dei  et  rerum  omni- 
um substantiam,  vel  essentiam: 
anathema  sit. 

4.  Si  quis  dixerit^  res  finitas^ 
turn,  corjporeas  turn  sjpirituales 
aut  saltern  sjpirituales,  e  divina 
substantia  emanasse ;  aut  divi- 
nam  essentiam  sui  manifesta- 
tione  vel  evolutione  fieri  omnia  ^ 
aut  denique  Deum  esse  ens  uni- 


ever  to  be  departed  from,  under 
the  pretense  or  pretext  of  a  deeper 
comprehension  of  them.  Let,  then, 
the  intelligence,  science,  and  wis- 
dom of  each  and  all,  of  individuals 
and  of  the  whole  Church,  in  all 
ages  and  all  times,  increase  and 
flourish  in  abundance  and  vigfor: 
but  simply  in  its  own  proper  kind, 
that  is  to  say,  in  one  and  the  same 
doctrine,  one  and  the  same  sense, 
one  and  the  same  judgment.^ 

Canons. 
I- 

Of  Godj  the  Creator  of  all  things. 

1.  If  any  one  shall  deny  one  true 
God,  Creator  and  Lord  of  things 
visible  and  invisible:  let  him  be 
anathema. 

2.  If  any  one  shall  not  be 
ashamdd  to  affirm  that,  except 
matter,  nothing  exists :  let  him  be 
anathema. 

3.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the 
substance  and  essence  of  God  and 
of  all  things  is  one  and  the  same : 
let  him  be  anathema. 

4.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  finite 
things,  both  corporeal  and  spiritual, 
or  at  least  spiritual,  have  emanated 
from  the  divine  substance ;  or  that 
the  divine  essence  by  the  manifesta- 
tion and  evolution  of  itself  becomes 
all  things;  or,  lastly,  that  God  is 


*  Vincent,  of  Lerins,  Common,  n.  28. 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


149 


versale  seu  indefinitum,  quod  sese 
deterynirmndo  constituat  rerum 
universitatem  in  genera,  species 
et  individua  dlstinctmn :  anathe- 
ma sit. 

5.  Si  quis  non  C07ifiteatur, 
niundum,  resque  omnes,  qucB  in 
eo  continentur,  et  sjpirituales  et 
Tnateriales,  secundum  totam  su- 
am  sudstantiam  a  Deo  ex  nihilo 
esse  productas ;  aut  Deum^  di- 
xerit  non  voluntate  ah  omni  ne- 
cessitate libera,  sed  tarn  neces- 
sario  creasse,  quam  necessario 
amat  seipsum;  aut  7nundum  ad 
Dei  gloriam  conditum  esse  ne- 
gaverit :  anathema  sit. 

II. 

De  Revelatione. 

1.  Si  quis  dixerit,  Deum  imuni 
et  verum,  Creatorem  et  Dominum 
nostrum,  per  ea,  quoe  facta  sunt, 
naturali  rationis  humance  lumine 
certo  cognosci  non  posse :  anathe- 
ma sit. 

2.  Si  quis  dixerit,  fieri  non 
posse,  aut  non  expedire  ut  per 
revelationem  divinam  homo  de 
Deo  cultuque  ei  exhibendo  edo- 
ceatur :  anathema  sit. 

3.  Si  quis  dixerit,  homhiem 
ad  cognitionem  et  perfectionem^ 
quce  naturalem  superet,  divini- 
tus  evehi  non  posse,  sed  ex  seipso 


universal  or  indefinite  being,  which 
by  determining  itself  constitutes  the 
universality  of  things,  distinct  ac- 
cording to  genera,  species,  and  in- 
dividuals :  let  him  be  anathema. 

5.  If  any  one  confess  not  that 
the  world,  and  all  things  which  are 
contained  in  it,  both  spiritual  and 
material,  have  been,  in  their  whole 
substance,  produced  by  God  out  of 
nothing ;  or  shall  say  tliat  God  cre- 
ated, not  by  his  will,  free  from  all 
necessity,  but  by  a  necessity  equal 
to  the  necessity  whereby  he  loves 
himself;  or  shall  deny  that  the 
world  was  made  for  the  glory  of 
God :  let  him  be  anathema. 

n. 

Of  Revelation. 

1.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the 
one  true  God,  our  Creator  and  Lord, 
can  not  be  certainly  known  by  the 
natural  light  of  human  reason 
through  created  things:  let  him 
be  anathema. 

2.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  it  is 
impossible  or  inexpedient  that  man 
should  be  taught  by  divine  revela- 
tion concerning  God  and  the  wor- 
ship to  be  paid  to  him :  let  him  be 
anathema. 

3.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  man 
can  not  be  raised  by  divine  power 
to  a  higher  than  natural  knowledge 
and  perfection,  but  can  and  ought, 


150 


DJoMATlC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


ad  omnis  tandem  veri  et  honi 
possessionem  jagi  jprofectu  per- 
tingere  ^osse  et  debere :  anathe- 
ma sit. 

4.  Si  quis  sacroB  ScftnpturcB  II- 
hros  integros  cum  omnibus  suis 
jpartihus^  jproxd  illos  sancta  Tri- 
dentina  Synodus  recensuit,  jpro 
sacris  et  canonicis  non  suscepe- 
ritj  aut  eos  divinitus  insjpirdtos 
esse  negaverit :  anathema  sit. 

III. 

De  Fide. 

1.  Si  qiiis  dixerit,  rationem 
humanam  ita  indejpendentem 
esse,  lit  fides  ei  a  Deo  imperari 
non  jpossit :  anathema  sit. 

2.  Si  quis  dixerit,  fidem  divi- 
nam  a  naturali  de  Deo  et  rebus 
moralibus  scientia  non  distin- 
giH,  ac  jpTojpterea  ad  fidem  divi- 
nam  non  reqiiiri,  iit  revelata 
Veritas  projpter  auctoritatem  Dei 
revelantis  credatur :  anathema 
sit. 

3.  Si  quis  dixerit,  revelatio- 
nem  divinam  externis  signis  cre- 
dihilem  fieri  non  2>osse,  ideoque 
sola  interna  cxijusque  experien- 
tia  aut  insjpiratione  jprivata  ho- 
mines ad  fidem  moveri  debere : 
anathema  sit. 

4.  Si  quis  dixerit,  miracula 
nulla  fieri  jposse,  jproindeque 
omnes  de  iis  narrajtiones^  etiam 


by  a  continuous  progress,  to  arrive 
at  length,  of  himself,  to  the  posses- 
sion of  all  that  is  true  and  good: 
let  him  be  anathema. 

4.  If  any  one  shall  not  receive 
as  sacred  and  canonical  the  books 
of  Holy  Scripture,  entire  witli  all 
their  parts,  as  the  holy  Synod  of 
Trent  has  enumerated  them,  or  shall 
deny  that  they  have  been  divinely 
inspired :  let  him  be  anathema. 

III. 

On  Faith. 

1.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  hu- 
man reason  is  so  independent  that 
faith  can  not  be  enjoined  upon  it 
by  God :  let  him  be  anathema. 

2.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  "di- 
vine faith  is  not  distinguished  from 
natural  knowledge  of  God  and  of 
moral  truths,  and  therefore  that  it 
is  not  requisite  for  divine  faith  that 
revealed  truth  be  believed  because 
of  the  authority  of  God,  who  re- 
veals it:  let  him  be  anathema. 

3.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  divine 
revelation  can  not  be  made  credible 
by  outward  signs,  and  therefore  tliat 
men  ought  to  be  moved  to  faith 
solely  by  the  internal  experience 
of  each,  or  by  private  inspiration : 
let  him  be  anathema. 

4.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  mira- 
cles are  impossible,  and  therefore 
that   all    the    accounts    regarding 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


151 


in  sacra  Scrijpticra  contentas^  i7i- 
ter  fabulas  vet  mythos  ablegan- 
das  esse;  aut  miracula  certo 
cognosci  nunqtiatn  jposse,  nee  iis 
divinam  religionis  Christia^ice 
originem  rite  jprohan^i :  anathe- 
ma sit, 

5.  Si  quis  dlxerit,  assensum 
fidei  Christianoi  7ion  esse  libe- 
runi,  sed  argumentis  humance 
rationis  necessario  jproduci ;  aut 
ad  solain  fidem  vivam,  quce  per 
caritatem  operatur^  gratiam  Dei 
necessariam  esse :  anathema  sit. 

6.  Si  quis  dixerit,  jparem  esse 
conditioneni  fidelimn  atque  eo- 
rurn,  qui  ad  fidem  unice  veram 
nondum  pervenerunt,  ita  xit  Ca- 
tholici  justam  causam  habere 
possint,  fidem ^  quam  sub  Eccle- 
si(B  magisterio  jam  susceperunt, 
assensu  suspenso  in  dubium  vo- 
candi,  donee  demonstrationhn 
scientificain  eredibilitatis  et  xe- 
ritatis  fidei  suce  absolverint : 
anathema  sit. 

IV. 

De  Fide  et  Ratione. 

1.  Si  quis  dixeritj  in  revela- 
tione  divina  nulla  vera  et  pro- 
prie  dieta  mysteria  contineri^ 
sed  imiversa  fidei  dogmata  posse 
per  rationem  rite  excultam  e  na- 
turalibus  principiis  intelUgi  et 
demonstrari :  anathema  sit. 


them,  even  those  contained  in  Holy 
Scripture,  are  to  be  dismissed  as 
fabulous  or  mythical ;  or  that  mira- 
cles can  never  be  known  with  cer- 
tainty, and  tliat  the  divine  origin 
of  Christianity  can  not  be  proved 
by  them :  let  him  be  anathema. 

5.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the 
assent  of  Christian  faith  is  not  a 
free  act,  but  inevitably  produced  by 
the  arguments  of  human  reason ;  or 
that  the  grace  of  God  is  necessary 
for  thatlivingfaith  only  which  work- 
eth  by  charity :  let  him  be  anathema. 

6.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the 
condition  of  the  faithful,  and  of 
those  who  have  not  yet  attained  to 
the  only  true  faith,  is  on  a  par,  so 
til  at  Catholics  may  have  just  cause 
for  doubting,  with  suspended  assent, 
the  faith  which  they  have  already 
received  under  the  magisterinm  of 
the  Church,  until  they  shall  have 
obtained  a  scientific  demonstration 
of  the  credibility  and  truth  of  their 
faith :  let  him  be  anathema. 

IV. 

On  Faith  and  Reason. 

1.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  in  di- 
vine revelation  there  are  no  myster- 
ies, truly  and  properly  so  called,  but 
that  all  the  doctrines  of  faith  can  be 
understood  and  demonstrated  from 
natural  principles,  by  properly  culti- 
vated reason :  let  him  be  anathema. 


152 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


2.  Si  quis  dixerit,  disciplinas 
humanas  ea  cum  libertate  trac- 
tandas  esse,  ut  earum  assertiones, 
etsi  doctrinoe  revelatce  adversen- 
tur,  tanquam  verce  retineri,  neque 
ah  JEcclesia  jproscribi  j^ossint : 
anatheina  sit. 

3.  Si  quis  dixerit,  fieri  jposse, 
ut  dog7natlhus  ah  Ecdesia  jpro- 
jpositis,  aliquando  secundum  jpro- 
gressum  scientice  sensus  trihuen- 
dus  sit  alius  ah  eo,  quern  intel- 
lexit  et  intelligit  Ecdesia :  anathe- 
ma sit. 

Itaque  sujpremi  jpastoralis  Nos- 
tri  officii  debitum  exequentes, 
omnes  Christi  fideles,  maxime 
vero  eos,  qui  jprcusunt  vel  docen- 
di  tnunere  funguntur,  per  visce- 
ra Jesu  Christi  ohtestamur,  nec- 
non  ejusdem  Dei  et  Salvatovis 
nostri  auctoritate  juhemus,  ut 
ad  has  err  ores  a  Sancta  Ecdesia 
arcendos  et  eliminandos,  atque 
jpurissiraoR  fidei  lucem  jpanden- 
dam  studium  et  ojperam  confe- 
rant. 

Quoniam  vero  satis  non  est, 
hcereticam  jpravitatem  devitare, 
nisi  a  quoque  errores  diligenter 
fugiantur,  qui  ad  illam  plus 
minusve  accedunt ;  omnes  officii 
monemus,  servandi  etiam  Consti- 
tutiones  et  Deer  eta,  quihus  pra- 
vce  ejusmodi  opiniones,  quae  isthic 


2.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  human 
sciences  are  to  be  so  freely  treated 
that  their  assertions,  althoiigli  op- 
posed to  revealed  doctrine,  are  to 
be  held  as  true,  and  can  not  be  con- 
demned by  the  Church :  let  him  be 
anathema. 

3.  If  any  one  shall  assert  it  to  be 
possible  that  sometimes,  according 
to  the  progress  of  science,  a  sense 
is  to  be  given  to  doctrines  propound- 
ed by  the  Church  different  from  that 
which  the  Church  has  understood  and 
understands :  let  him  be  anathema^ 

Therefore,  we,  fulfilling  the  duty 
of  our  supreme  pastoral  office,  en- 
treat, by  the  mercies  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and,  by  the  authority  of  the  same, 
our  God  and  Saviour,  we  command, 
all  the  faithful  of  Christ,  and  espe- 
cially those  who  are  set  over  others, 
or  are  charged  with  the  office  of  in- 
struction, that  they  earnestly  and 
diligently  apply  themselves  to  ward 
off  and  eliminate  these  errors  from 
holy  Church,  and  to  spread  the  light 
of  pure  faith. 

And  since  it  is  not  sufficient  to 
shun  heretical  pravity,  unless  those 
errors  also  be  diligently  avoided 
which  more  or  less  nearly  approach 
it,  we  admonish  all  men  of  the  fur. 
ther  duty  of  observing  those  consti 
tutions  and  decrees  by  w^hich  such 
erroneous  opinions  as  are  not  here 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


153 


diserte  non  enumerantur,  ah  hac 
Sancta  Sede  ^oscrijptoe  et  jpro- 
hibitce  sunt. 

Datum  Romce  in  j>ubl^ca  Ses- 
sione  in  Vaticana  Basilica  so- 
lemniter  celehrata,  anno  Incarna- 
tionis  DominiccB  millesimo  octin- 
gentesimo  septuagesimo^  die  vige- 
sima  quarta  Aprilis.  Pontifica- 
tus  Nostri  anno  vigesimo  qiiarto. 


CONSTITUTIO  DOGMATICA  PeIMA  DE 
ECCLESIA   ChKISTI. 

JEdita  in  Sessions  Quarta  Sacro- 
saricti  (Ecumenici  Concilii  Va- 
ticani. 


PIUS  EPISCOPUS,  SERVUS  SERVORUM 
DEI  SACRO  APPROBANTE  CONCI- 
LIO  AD  PERPETUAM  REI  MEMORI- 
AM. 

Pastor  ceternus  et  Episcopus 
animarum  nostrarum^  ut  salu- 
tlferum  Pedemptionis  opus  'pe- 
renne  redderet,  sanctam  (jedifi- 
care  Ecclesiam  decrevit,  in  qua 
veluti  in  domo  Dei  viventis 
fideles  omnes  unins  fidei  et  cain- 
tatis  vi7icido  continerentur.  Qua- 
proptevy  priusquam  darificare- 
tur,  rogavit  Patrem  non  pro 
Apostolis  tantum^  sed  et  pro  eis, 
qui  credituri  erant  per  verhum 
eoruni  in  ij?su7ny  ut  omnes  immn 


specifically  enumerated,  have  been 
proscribed  and  condemned  by  this 
Holy  See. 

Given  at  Rome  in  public  Session 
solemnly  held  in  the  Vatican  Basil- 
ica in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  sev- 
enty, on  the  twenty-fourth  day  of 
April,  in  the  twenty-fourth  year  of 
our  Pontificate. 


First  Dogmatic  Constitution  on 
THE  Church  of  Christ. 

Published  in  the  Fourth  Session 
of  the  holy  (Ecumenical  Council 
of  the  Vatican. 

PIUS  bishop,  servant  of  the  serv- 


EVERLASTING  REME:^IBRANCE. 

The  eternal  Pastor  and  Bisliop 
of  our  souls,  in  order  to  continue 
for  all  time  the  life-giving  work 
of  his  Pedemption,  determined  to 
build  up  the  holy  Church,  where- 
in, as  in  the  house  of  che  living 
God,  all  who  believe  might  be 
united  in  the  bond  of  one  faith 
and  one  charity.  Wherefore,  be- 
fore he  entered  into  his  glory,  he 
prayed  unto  the  Father,  not  for  the 
Apostles  only,  but  for  tliose  also 
who  through  their  preaching  should 


154 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


e^ssent,  sicut  ipse  Filius  et  Pa- 
ter uniiTTi  sunt.  Quemadmodum 
ig'itur  Aj)ostolos,  qiios  sibi  de 
mundo  elegerat^  misit,  sicut  ipse 
missus  erat  a  Patre :  ita  hi 
Ecclesia  sua  jpastores  et  docto- 
res  usqice  ad  consummationem 
sceculi  esse  voluit.  Tit  vero  ej[)i- 
scojpatus  ipse  unus  et  indivisus 
esset,  et  jper  cohcBrerites  sibi  in- 
mcem  sacerdotes  credentium  mul- 
titudo  universa  in  fdei  et  com- 
munionis  unitate  conservaretu't\ 
heatum  Petrum  cceteris  Ajposto- 
lis  j[)7'cepo7iens  in  i2Jso  instltuit 
jperjpetuxun  ittriusque  iinitatis 
^rincipiwni  ac  visihile  fanda- 
mentum,  sujper  cujus  fortitudi- 
nem  (Sternum  exstrueretur  tern- 
jplum^  et  EcclesicB  coelo  infer  en- 
da  sublimitas  in  hujus  fidei 
firmitate  consurgeret.  Et  quo- 
niam  portae  inferi  ad  everten- 
dam,  si  fieri  posset,  Ecclesiam, 
contra  ejus  fandamentuTn  di- 
t'initus  positum  majori  in  dies 
odio  undique  insurgunt,  Wos\ 
ad  Catholici  gregis  custodiam, ! 
incolumitateni,  augmeritum,  ne- 1 
cessarium  esse  judicamUs,  sacro 
approhante  Concilio,  doctrinam 
de    institutione,  perpetuitate,  ac 


come  to  believe  in  him,  that  all 
might  be  one  even  as  he  the  Son 
and  the  Father  are  one.^  As  then 
he  sent  the  Apostles  whom  he  had 
chosen  to  himself  from  the  world, 
as  he  himself  had  been  sent  by 
the  Father :  so  he  willed  that  there 
should  ever  be  pastors  and  teachers 
in  his  Church  to  the  end  of  the 
world.  And  in  order  that  the  Epis- 
copate also  might  be  one  and  undi- 
vided, and  that  by  means  of  a  close- 
ly united  priesthood  the  multitude 
of  the  faithful  might  be  kept  secure 
in  the  oneness  of  faith  and  commu- 
nion, he  set  blessed  Peter  over  the 
rest  of  the  Apostles,  and  fixed  in 
him  the  abiding  principle  of  this 
twofold  unity,  and  its  visible  foun- 
dation, in  the  strength  of  which  the 
everlasting  temple  should  arise,  and 
the  Church  in  the  firmness  of  that 
faith  should  lift  her  majestic  front 
to  Heaven.^  And  seeing  that  the 
gates  of  hell,  with  daily  increase  of 
hatred,  are  gatliering  their  strength 
on  every  side  to  upheave  the  foun- 
dation laid  by  God's  own  hand,  and 
so,  if  that  might  be,  to  overthrow 
the  Church :  we,  therefore,  for  the 
preservation,  safe-keeping,  and  in- 
crease of  the  Catholic  flock,  with 


*  John  xvii.  21. 

'  From  Sermon  IV.  chap.  ii.  of  St.  Leo  the  Great,  A.D.  440,  Vol.  I.  p.  17  of  edition  of 
Ballerini,  Venice,  1753  ;  read  in  the  eighth  lectiou  on  the  Feast  of  St.  Peter's  Chair  at  Aa- 
tioch,  February  22. 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


155 


natura  sacri  Apostolici  jprima- 
tus,  in  quo  totius  Ecclesice  vis 
ac  soliditas  consistif,  cimciis 
fidelihus  credendam  et  tenen- 
dam,  secundum  antiqiiam  atque 
constantem  universalis  Ecclesia^ 
Jldem,  jprojponere^  atque  contra- 
rios,  dominico  gregi  adeo  jperni- 
closos,  errores  ^proscrihere  et  con- 
demnare. 


Caput  I. 

De  Apostolici  Primatus  in  beato  Petro  in- 
stilutione. 

Docemus  itaque  et  declaramus, 
juxta  Evangelii  testimonia  jpri- 
matum  jurisdictionis  in  univer- 
sam  Dei  Ecclesiam  immediate 
et  directe  heato  Petro  Ajpostolo 
jpromissum  atque  collatum  a 
Christo  Domino  fuisse.  Unum. 
enim  Simonem,  cid  jam  'pridem 
dixerat :  Tu  vocaheris  Cephas, 
postquann  ille  suam  edidit  con- 
fessionem  inquiens :  Tu  es 
Christus,  Filius  Dei  vivi,  solem- 
nihus  his  verbis  allocutus  est 
Dominus :  Meatus  es,  Simon 
Bar-Jona,  quia  caro  et  sanguis 
non  revelavit  tibi,  sed  Pater 
mens,  qui   in  coelis  est :    et   ego 


the  approval  of  the  sacred  Coun- 
cil, do  judge  it  to  be  necessary  to 
propose  to  the  belief  and  accept- 
ance of  all  the  faithful,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  ancient  and  constant 
faith  of  the  universal  Church,  the 
doctrine  touching  the  institution, 
perpetuity,  and  nature  of  the  sacred 
Apostolic  Primacy,  in  which  is 
found  the  strength  and  solidity  of 
the  entire  Church,  and  at  the  same 
time  to  proscribe  and  condemn  the 
contrary  errors,  so  hurtful  to  the 
flock  of  Christ. 

Chapter  I. 

Of  the  Institution  of  the  Apostolic  Primacy 
in  blessed  Peter. 

We  therefore  teach  and  declare 
that,  according  to  the  testimony  of 
the  Gospel,  the  primacy  of  juris- 
diction over  the  universal  Church 
of  God  was  immediately  and  di- 
rectly promised  and  given  to  blessed 
Peter  the  Apostle  by  Christ  the 
Lord.  For  it  was  to  Simon  alone, 
to  whom  he  had  already  said :  ^  Thou 
shalt  be  called  Cephas,'  ^  that  the 
Lord  after  the  confession  made  by 
him,  saying:  'Thou  art  the  Christ, 
the  Son  of  the  living  God,'  addressed 
these  solemn  words:  'Blessed  art 
thon,  Simon  Bar-Jona,  because  flesh 
and  blood  have  not  revealed  it  to 
thee,  but  my  Father  who  is  in  heaven. 


»  John  i.  42, 


156 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


dico  tibi,  quia  tu  es  Petrus,  et 
super  hano  Petram  cedificaho 
Ecdesiam  meam,  et  jportcR  in- 
feri  non  jprcBvalehunt  adversus 
earn :  et  tlhi  dabo  claves  regni 
coelorum :  et  quodcuinque  liga- 
veris  super  terram^  erit  ligatuin 
et  in  coelis :  et  quodcumque  sol- 
veris  super  terram^  erit  solutum 
et  in  codis.  Atque  uni  Simoni 
Petro  contulit  Jesus  jpost  suarn 
Tesurrectionem  summi  jpastoris 
et  Tectoris  jurisdictioiiem  in  to- 
tum  suum  ovile  dicens :  Pasce 
agnos  Qneos :  Pasce  oves  tneas. 
II'uiG  tarn  manifestcB  sacrarum 
Scripturarum  doctrince,  iit  ah 
Ecclesia  Catholica  semper  intel- 
lecta  est,  aperte  opponuntur 
pravcB  ^  eo7'um  sententice,  qui, 
constitutam  a  Christo  Domino 
in  sua  Ecclesia  regiminis  for- 
mam  pervertentes,  negant,  so- 
lum Petrwn  prat  ceteris  Apo- 
stolis,  sive  seorsum  singulis 
sive  omnibus  simul,  vero  pro- 
prioque  jurisdictionis  primatu 
fuisse  a  Christo  instructum ; 
aut  qui  affirmant,  eundem  pri- 
matum  non  immediate  directe- 
que  ipsi  beato  Petro,  sed  Ec- 
clesice,  et  per  hanc  illi  ut  ip- 
sius  Ecclesice  ministro  delatum 
fuisse. 

Si  quis  igitur  dixerit,  beatum 


And  I  say  to  thee  that  thou  art 
Peter ;  and  npon  this  rock  I  will 
build  my  Church,  and  the  gates  of 
hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it. 
And  I  will  give  to  thee  the  keys  of 
the  kingdom  of  heaven.  And  what- 
soever thou  shalt  bind  on  earth, 
it  shall  be  bound  also  in  heaven ; 
and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on 
earth,  it  shall  be  loosed  also  in 
heaven.'^  And  it  was  upon  Simon 
alone  that  Jesus  after  his  resurrec- 
tion bestowed  the  jurisdiction  of 
chief  pastor  and  ruler"  over  all  his 
fold  in  the  words :  '  Feed  my  lambs; 
feed  my  sheep.''  ^  At  open  variance 
with  this  clear  doctrine  of  Holy 
Scripture  as  it  has  been  ever  under- 
stood by  the  Catholic  Church  are 
the  perverse  opinions  of  those  who, 
while  they  distort  the  form  of  gov- 
ernment established  by  Christ  the 
Lord  in  his  Church,  deny  that  Pe- 
ter in  his  single  person,  preferably 
to  all  the  other  Apostles,  whether 
taken  separately  or  together,  was 
endowed  by  Christ  with  a  true  and 
proper  primacy  of  jurisdiction  ;  or 
of  those  who  assert  that  the  same 
primacy  was  not  bestowed  immedi- 
ately and  directly  upon  blessed  Pe- 
ter himself,  but  upon  the  Church, 
and  through  the  Church  on  Peter 
as  her  minister. 

If  any  one,  therefore,  shall  say 


Matt,  xvi.  16-19. 


'John  xxi.  15-17. 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


157 


Petrum  Apostolum  non  esse  a 
Christo  Domino  constitutum 
AjpostoloTum  omniiivi  j)ri7ici- 
pem  et  totius  Ecclesice  militan- 
iis  visibile  caput;  vel  eimdem 
honoris  tantum,  non  autem  verce 
jpropri  que  jicrisdictionis  j>ri- 
matuin  ah  eodem  Domino  nos- 
tro  Jesio  Christo  directe  et  im- 
mediate  accepisse :  anathema  sit. 

Caput  II. 

De  perpetuitate  Primatus  heati  Petri  in 
Romanis  Pontijicibus. 

Quod  autem  in  heato  Aposto- 
lo  Petro  jprincejps  pastorum  et 
pastor  7nagnus  ovium  Dominus 
Christus  Jesus  in  perpetuam  sa- 
hUem  ao  perenne  bonur/i  Eccle- 
sice instituit,  id  eodem  auctore 
in  Ecclesice  J  quoe  fundata  super 
petram  ad  Jinem  soeculorum 
usque  firma  stahit,  jugiter  du- 
rare  necesse  est.  Ntdli  sane  du- 
liic7n^  imo  sceculis  omnibus  no- 
tum  est,  quod  sanctus  heatissi- 
mus<jiie  Petrus,  Apostolorum 
princeps  et  cajmt  fideique  co- 
lumnar et  Ecclesice  Catholicce 
fundamentum,  a  Domino  nos- 
tro  Jesu  Christo,  Salvatore  hu- 
mani  generis  ac  Pedemptore, 
claves  regni  accepit :  qui  ad 
hoc  xisque  tempus  et  semper  in 
suis  successor ibus,  episcopis  sanc- 
tce  PomancB  Sedis,  ab  ipso  fun- 


that  blessed  Peter  the  Apostle  was 
not  appointed  the  Prince  of  all  the 
Apostles  and  the  Yisible  Head  of 
the  whole  Church  Militant;  or  that 
the  same  directly  and  immediately 
received  from  the  same  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  a  primacy  of  honor 
only,  and  not  of  true  and  proper 
jurisdiction:  let  him  be  anathe- 
ma. * 

Chapter  II. 

On  the  Perpetuity  of  the  Primacy  of  blessed 
Peter  in  the  Roman  Pontiffs. 

That  which  the  Prince  of  Shep- 
herds and  great  Shepherd  of  the 
sheep,  Jesus  Christ. our  Lord,  estab- 
lished in  the  person  of  the  blessed 
Apostle  Peter  to  secure  the  peq3et- 
ual  welfare  and  lasting  good  of  the 
Church,  must,  by  the  same  institu- 
tion, necessarily  remain  unceasing- 
ly in  the  Church;  which,  being 
founded  upon  the  Hock,  will  stand 
firm  to  the  end  of  the  world.  For 
none  can  doubt,  and  it  is  known  to 
all  ages,  that  the  holy  and  blessed 
Peter,  the  Prince  and  Chief  of  the 
Apostles,  the  pillar  of  the  faith  and 
foundation  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
received  the  keys  of  the  kingdom 
from  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Sav- 
iour and  Kedeemer  of  mankind,  and 
lives,  presides,  and  judges,  to  this 
day  and  always,  in  his  successoi-s 
the  Bishops  of  the  Holy  See  of 


158 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


daioEy  ejusque  consecratoe  san- 
guine, vlvit  et  ^roesidet  et  judi- 
cium exercet.  Unde  qxdcwnqxie 
in  hao  Cathedra  Petro  succe- 
dit,  is  secundum  Christi  ipsius 
institutionem  jprimatum  Petri 
in  universam  Ecclesiam  obtinet. 
Manet  ergo  dhjpositio  veritatis, 
et  heatus  Petrus,  in  accejpta  for- 
titudine  jpetroR  ^erseverans,  sus- 
cejpta  Ecclesioe  guhernacula  non 
reliquit.  Ilac  de  causa  ad  Po- 
manain  Ecclesiam  jpropter  jpo- 
tentiorem  jprincijpalitatem  necesse 
semjper  fuii  omnem  co?ivenire 
Ecclesiam,  hoc  est,  eos,  qui  sunt 
undique  fideles,  ut  in  ea  Sede, 
e  qua  venerandm  communionis 
jura  in  omnes  dimanant,  tara- 
quam  membra  in  cajpite  conso- 
ciata,  in  imam  corjporis  comjpa- 
gem  codlescerent. 


Si  quis  ergo  dixerit,  non  esse 
ex  ipsius  Christi  Domini  insti- 
txitione,  seic  jure  divino,  lit  hea- 
tus Petrus  in  jprimatu  super 
universam  Ecclesiam  habeat  jper- 


Eome,  which  was  founded  by  him, 
and  consecrated  by  his  blood.^ 
Whence,  whosoever  succeeds  to  Pe- 
ter in  this  See,  does  by  the  institu- 
tion of  Christ  himself  obtain  the 
Primacy  of  Peter  over  the  whole 
Church.  The  disposition  made  by 
Incarnate  Truth  therefore  remains, 
and  blessed  Peter,  abiding  through 
the  strength  of  the  Eock  in  the 
power  that  lie  received,  has  not 
abandoned  the  direction  of  the 
Church.2  Wherefore  it  has  at  all 
times  been  necessary  that  every 
particular  Church — that  is  to  say, 
the  faithful  throughout  the  world 
— should  agree  with  the  Roman 
Church,  on  account  of  the  greater 
authority  of  the  princedom  which 
this  has  received;  that  all  being 
associated  in  the  unity  of  that  See 
whence  the  rights  of  communion 
spread  to  all,  might  grow  together 
as  members  of  one  Head  in  the 
compact  unity  of  tb.c  body.^ 

If,  then,  any  should  deny  that  it 
is  by  the  institution  of  Christ  the 
Lord,  or  by  divine  i  ight,that  blessed 
Peter  should  have  a  perpetual  line 
of  successors  in  the  Primacy  over 


'  From  the  Acts  (Session  Third)  of  the  Third  General  Council  of  Ephesus,  A.D,  431,  Labbe's 
Councils,  Vol.  III.  p.  1154,  Venice  edition  of  1728.  See  also  letter  of  St.  Peter  Chrysologus 
to  Kutjches,  in  life  prefixed  to  his  works,  p.  13,  Venice,  1750. 

="  From  Sermon  III.  chap.  iii.  of  St.  Leo  the  Great,  Vol.  I.  p.  1 2. 

^  From  St.  Irenaus  against  Heresies,  Book  III.  cap.  iii.  p.  175,  Benedictine  edition,  Venice, 
1734;  and  Acts  of  Synod  of  Aquileja,  A.D.  381,Labbe's  Councils,  Vol.  II.  p.  1185,  Venice, 
1728. 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


159 


petuos  successores;  aut  Roma- 
niun  Pontificem  non  esse  heati 
Petri  in  eodem  primatu  sucees- 
sorem :  anathema  sit. 

Caput  III. 

De  vi  et  ratione  Primatus  Romani  Ponti- 
Jicis. 

Quaprojpter  ajpertis  innixi  sa- 
crarum  litteraruin  testimoniis,  et 
inhcerentes  turn  Proedecessoricm 
JSfostrorwn,  Pomanorum  Ponti- 
ficum^  turn  Conciliorum  gensra- 
lium  distvtis  jperspicidsque  de- 
cretis,  innovamus  mcumenici  Con- 
cilii  Florentini  definitionem^  qua 
credendum  ah  omnibus  Christi 
fidelihus  est,  sanctam  Apostoli- 
cam  Sedem,  et  Pomanum  Ponti- 
ficem in  xmiverswn  oxhern  tenere 
primatnm,,  ct  ipsuTn  Pontificem 
Pomannm  successorem  esse  heaii 
Petri,  jprinci/pis  Apostolorum,  et 
verum  Christi  Vicariwn,  totius- 
qiie  Ecclesice  caput,  et  omnium 
Christianorum  patrem  ac  dobto- 
reni  existere ;  et  ipsi  in  heato  Pe- 
tro  pascendi,  regendi  ac  guber- 
nayidi  universalenn  Ecclesiam  a 
Domino  nostro  Jesu  Christo  ple- 
nam  potestatem  traditam  esse ; 
quemadmodum  etiam  in  gestis 
cecumenicorum  Conciliorum  et  sa- 
cris  canonibus  continetur. 

Docemus  proinde  et  declara- 
mus,  Ecclesiam   Pomanam,  dis- 


the  universal  Church,  or  that  the 
Roman  Pontiff  is  the  successor  of 
blessed  Peter  in  this  primacy:  let 
him  be  anathema. 

Chapter  III. 

On  the  Power  and  Nature  of  the  Primacy  of 
the  Roman  Pontiff. 

Wherefore,  resting  on  plain  tes- 
timonies of  the  Sacred  Writings, 
and  adhering  to  the  plain  and  ex- 
press decrees  both  of  oar  predeces- 
sors, the  Roman  Pontiffs,  and  of 
the  General  Councils,  we  renew 
the  definition  of  the  oecumenical 
Council  of  Florence,  in  virtue  of 
whicli  all  the  faithful  of  Christ 
must  believe  that  the  holy  Apos- 
tolic See  and  the  Roman  Pontiff 
possesses  the  primacy  over  the 
whole  world,  and  that  the  Roman 
Pontiff  is  the  successor  of  blessed 
Peter,  Prince  of  the  Apostles,  and 
is  true  vicar  of  Christ,  and  head 
of  the  whole  Church,  and  father 
and  teacher  of  all  Christians; 
and  tliat  full  power  was  given  to 
him  in  blessed  Peter  to  rule,  feed, 
and  govern  the  universal  Church 
by  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord;  as  is 
also  contained  in  tlie  acts  of  tlie 
General  Councils  and  in  the  sa- 
cred Canons. 

Hence  we  teach  and  declare  that 
by  the  appointment  of  our  Lord  the 


160 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


jponente  Domino,  super  omnes 
alias  ordinaries.  •  jpotestatis  ohti- 
ne7'e  principatum,  et  hanc  Ro- 
mani  Pontijicis  jurisdictionis 
potestatem,  quce,  vere  episcopalis 
est,  immediatam  esse :  erga  quam 
cujuscumque  ritus  et  dignitatis 
pastores  atque  fideles,  tarn  seor- 
sum  singuli  quam  simul  omnes, 
officio  hierarchiccB  sichordinatio- 
nis  verceque  ohedientice  obstrin- 
guntur,  non  solum  in  rebus,  quoe 
ad  jidem  et  mores,  sed  etiam  in 
Us,  qiice  ad  disciplinam  et  regi- 
men Ecclesi(2  per  totum  orhem 
diffuson  pertinent;  it  a  tit,  cus- 
todita  cum  Romano  Pontifice 
tarn  communionis,  quam  ejusdem 
jldei  professionis  imitate,  Eccle- 
sicB  Christi  sit  unus  grex  sub 
tmo  summo  pastore.  Hoec  est 
Catholicce  veritatis  doctrina,  a 
qua  deviare  salva  fide  atque  sa- 
lute nemo  potest. 

Tantum  autem.  dbest,  ut  hoec 
Summi  Pontificis  potestas  offi- 
ciat  ordinaricE  ac  immediatce  illi 
episcopalis  jurisdictionis  pote- 
stati,  qua  Episcopi,  qui  positi  a 
Spiritu  Sancto  in  Apostoloriim 
locum  successerunt,  tamquam  ve- 
ri  pastores  assignatos  sibi  greges, 
singuli  singidos,  pascunt  et  re- 
gunt,  ut    eadem    a    supremo    et 


Eoman  Church  possesses  a  superi- 
ority of  ordinary  power  over  all 
other  churches,  and  that  tliis  power 
of  jurisdiction  of  the  Eoman  Pon- 
tiff, which  is  truly  episcopal,  is  im- 
mediate ;  to  which  all,  of  whatever 
rite  and  dignity,  both  pastors  and 
faithful,  both  individually  and  col- 
lectively, are  bound,  by  their  duty 
of  hierarchical  subordination  and 
true  obedience,  to  submit  not  only 
in  matters  which  belong  to  faith 
and  iporals,  but  also  in  those  that 
appertain  to  the  discipline  and  gov- 
ernment of  the  Church  throughout 
the  w^orld,  so  that  the  Church  of 
Christ  may  be  one  flock  under  one 
supreme  pastor  through  the  preser- 
vation of  unity  both  of  communion 
and  of  profession  of  the  same  faith 
with  the  Eoman  Pontiff.  This  is 
the  teaching  of  Catholic  truth,  from 
which  no  one  can  deviate  without 
loss  of  faith  and  of  salvation. 

But  so  far  is  this  powder  of  the 
Supreme  Pontiff  from  being  any 
prejudice  to  the  ordinary  and  im- 
mediate power  of  episcopal  juris- 
diction, by  which  Bishops,  who 
have  been  set  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
to  succeed  and  hold  the  place  of  the 
Apostles,^  feed  and  govern,  each  his 
own  flock,  as  true  pastors,  that  this 
their  episcopal  authority  is  really 


'  From  chap.  iv.  of  Twenty-third  Session  of  Council  of  Trent,  'Of  the  Ecclesiastical  Hie- 
rarchy.' 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


161 


.universali  Pastor e  asseratur,  to- 
horetur  ac  vindicetur,  secundum 
illud  sancti  Gregorii  Magiii : 
Meus  honor  est  honor  universa- 
lis Ecclesice.  Meus  honor  est 
fratrum  meorum  solidus  vigor. 
Turn  ego  vere  honoratus  sum^ 
cum  singidis  quibusgue  honor 
debitics  non  negatar. 

Porro  ex  sv/prema  ilia  Poma- 
ni  Pontificis  ^otestate  guhernan- 
di  universam  Ecdesiam  jus  ei- 
dem  esse  conseqidtur,  in  hujus 
stci  muneris  exercitio  libere  com- 
municandi  cum  jpastorihus  et 
gregihus  totius  Ecdesice^  ut  iidem 
ab  i^so  in  via  salutis  doceri  ac 
regi  possint.  Quare  damnamus 
ac  rejprobamus  illorum  senter^- 
tias,  qui  hanc  siipremi  capitis 
cum  pastoribus  et  gregibus  com- 
Tnunicationem  licite  impediri 
posse  dicunt,  aut  eandem  red- 
dunt  sceculari  potestati  obnoxi- 
am,  ita  iit  contendant,  quce  ab 
Apostolica  Sede  vet  ejus  aucto- 
ritate  ad  regimen  Ecclesice  con- 
^tituuntur,  vim  ac  valorem  non 
habere,  nisi,  potestatis  soecularis 
placito  confirmentur. 

Et  quoniam  divino  Apostolici 
primatus  jure  Pomanus  Ponti- 
fex    universcB    Ecclesice    proeest, 


asserted,  strengthened,  and  protect- 
ed by  the  supreme  and  universal 
Pastor;  in  accordance  with  the 
words  of  St.  Gregory  the  Great: 
'My  honor  is  the  honor  of  the 
whole  Church.  My  honor  is  the 
firm  strength  of  my  brethren.  1 
am  truly  honored  when  the  honor 
due  to  each  and  all  is  not  withheld.^ 

Further,  from  this  supreme  pow- 
er possessed  by  the  Koman  Pontiff 
of  governing  the  universal  Church, 
it  follows  that  he  has  the  right  of 
free  communication  with  the  pas- 
tors of  the  whole  Church,  and  with 
their  flocks,  that  these  may  be  taught 
and  ruled  by  him  in  the  way  of  sal- 
vation. Wherefore  we  condemn 
and  reject  the  opinions  of  those 
who  hold  that  the  communication 
between  this  supreme  head  and 
the  pastors  and  their  flocks  can 
lawfully  be  impeded ;  or  who  make 
this  communication  subject  to  the 
will  of  the  secular  power,  so  as  to 
maintain  that  whatever  is  done  by 
the  Apostolic  See,  or  by  its  au- 
thority, for  the  government  of  the 
Church,  can  not  have  force  or  value 
unless  it  be  confirmed  by  the  as- 
sent of  the  secular  power. 

And  since  by  the  divine  right 
of  Apostolic  primacy- the  Koman 
Pontiff  is  placed  over  the  universal 


*  From  the  letters  of  St.  Gregory  the  Great,  Book  VIII.  30,  Vol.lI.  p.  919,  Benedictine 
edition,  Paris,  1 705. 


162 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCII/. 


docemus  etiam  et  declaramus, 
emn  essejudicem  supremiwi  fide- 
lium,  et  in  omnibus  causis  ad 
exatnen  ecclesiasticum  sjpectanti- 
hus  ad  ipsius  jposse  judicium 
recurri  j  Sedis  vero  Apostolicce, 
cujus  audoritate  major  non  est, 
judicium  a  nemine  fore  retrac- 
tandum,  neqxie  cuiquam  de  ejits 
licere  jiidicare  judicio.  Quare 
a  recto  veritatis  tramite  aber- 
rant, qui  affirmant,  licere  ab  ju- 
diciis  BomanoTum  Pontijicum 
ad  cecicmenicum  Concilium  tam- 
quam  ad  auctoritate7)i  Romano 
Pontifice  suj)eriore7n  appellare. 

Si  quis  itaque  dixerit,  Roma- 
num  Pontificem  habere  tantum- 
inodo  officium,  inspectio7iis  vel 
dh'ectionis,  non  autem  jplenam 
et  su/premam  potestatem  jitris- 
dictionis  in  universam  Ecclesi- 
am,  non  solum  in  rebus,  quce 
ad  fidem  et  mores,  sed  etiam  in 
lis,  qu(z  ad  disciplinam  et  regi- 
men EcclesicB  jper  totum  orbem 
diffusoe  jpertinent ;  aut  eum  ha- 
bere tantum  jpotiores  partes,  non 
vero  totam  jplenitudinem  hujus 
sujpremce  jpotestatis ;  aut  hanc 
ejus  potestatem  non  esse  ordina- 
riam  et  immediatam  sive  in  om- 


Church,  we  further  teach  and  de- 
clare that  he  is  the  supreme  judge 
of  the  faithful,^  and  that  in  all 
causes,  the  decision  of  which  be- 
longs to  the  Church,  recourse  may 
be  had  to  his  tribunal,^  and  that 
none  may  re-open  the  judgment  of 
the  Apostolic  See,  than  whose  au- 
thority there  is  no  greater,  nor  can 
any  lawfully -review  its  judgment.^ 
Wherefore  they  err  from  the  right 
course  who  assert  that  it  is  lawful 
to  appeal  from  the  judgments  of 
the  Koman  Pontiffs  to  an  oecumen- 
ical Council,  as  to  an  authority  high- 
er than  that  of  tlie  Koman  Pontiff. 
If,  then,  any  shall  say  that  the 
Roman  Pontiff  has  the  office  mere- 
ly of  inspection  or  direction,  and 
not  full  and  supreme  power  of 
jurisdiction  over  the  universal 
Church,  not  only  in  things  which 
belong  to  faith  and  morals,  but 
also  in  those  which  relate  to  the 
discipline  and  government  of  the 
Church  spread  throughout  the 
world;  or  assert  that  he  possesses 
merely  the  principal  part,  and  not 
all  the  fullness  of  this  supreme 
power;  or  that  this  power  which 
he  enjoys  is  not  ordinary  and  im- 
mediate, both  over  each  and  all  the 


*  From  a  Brief  of  Pius  VI.  Super  soliditate,  of  Nov.  28, 1786. 

^  From  the  Acts  of  the  Fourteenth  General  Council  of  Lyons,  A.D.  1274  (Labbe's  Coun- 
cils, Vol.  XIV.  p.  512), 

'  From  Letter  VIII.  of  Pope  Nicholas  I.,  A.D.  858,  to  the  Emperor  Michael  (Labbe's 
Councils,  Vol.  IX.  pp.  1339  and  1570). 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


163 


nes  ac  smgulas  ecdesias,  sive  in 
omnes  et  singulos  pastores  et 
fideles :  anathema  sit. 

Caput  IV. 

De  Romani  Pvitijicis  wfalUhill  magiste- 
rio. 

Ipso  autem  Ajpostolico  pvima- 
tu,  qiiein  Homanus  Pontifex, 
tamquam  Petri  jprinci/pis  Ajpo- 
stoloruin  successor^  in  univer- 
sam  Ecdesiam  ohtinet,  supre- 
mam  quoque  magisterii  potesta- 
tem  comprehendi,  hceo  Sancta 
Sedes  semper  tenuity  perpetuus 
Ecdesim  usus  comprohat,  ipsa- 
que  oscumenica  Concilia,  ea  im- 
primis, in  quihus  Oriens  cum 
Occidente  in  fidei  caritatisqite 
%inionem  conveniehat,  declarave- 
runt.  Patres  enitn  Concilii 
Constantinopolitani  quarti,  ma- 
joriim  vestigiis  inhoerentes,  Jianc 
solemnem  ediderunt  professio- 
nem :  Prima  salus  est,  rectce 
fidei .  regulam  custodire.  Et 
quia  non  potest  Domini  nostri 
Jesu  Christi  prcetermitti  senten- 
tia  dicentis :  Tu  es  Petrus,  et 
super  hanc  petram  cedificaho 
Ecdesiam  meam,  hcBC,  quce  dicta 
sunt,  rerum  prohantur  effectibus, 
quia  in  Sede  Apostolica  imma- 
culata  est  semper  CatJiolica  reser- 
vata  religio,  et  sancta   celebrata 


churches,  and  over  each  and  all  the 
pastors  and  the  faithful:  let  him 
be  anathema. 

Chapter  IV. 

Concerning  the  Infallible  Teaching  of  the 
Roman  Pontiff. 

Moreover,  that  the  supreme  pow- 
er of  teaching  is  also  included  in 
the  Apostolic  primacy,  which  the 
Roman  Pontiff,  as  the  successor  of 
Peter,  Prince  of  the  Apostles,  pos- 
sesses over  the  whole  Church,  this 
Holy  See  lias  always  held,  the  per- 
petual practice  of  the  Church  con- 
firms, and  oecumenical  Councils  also 
have  declared,  especially  those  in 
which  the  East  with  the  West  met 
in  the  union  of  faith  and  charity. 
For  the  Fathers  of  the  Fourth  Conn- 
cil  of  Constantinople,  following  in 
the  footsteps  of  their  predecessors, 
gave  forth  this  solemn  profession : 
The  first  condition  of  salvation  is 
to  keep  the  rule  of  the  true  faith. 
And  because  the  sentence  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  can  not  be  passed 
by,  who  said:  'Thou  art  Peter, 
and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build 
my  Church,'^  these  things  which 
have  been  said  are  approved  by 
events,  because  in  the  Apostolic 
See  the  Catholic  religion  and  her 
holy  and  well-known  doctrine  has 
always  been  kept  undefiled.     De- 


Matt.  xvi.  18. 


164 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


doctrina.  Ah  hujus  ergo  fide  et 
doctrina  separari  Tnijiime  citpi- 
entes,  sjperarrnts,  ut  in  una  corn- 
micnione,  qiiavn  Sedes  Apostolica 
pnedicat,  esse  mereamicr,  in  qua 
est  integro.'  et  vera  Christiance 
religionis  soliditas.  Ajpjprobante 
vero  Lugdiinensi  Concilio  sccun- 
do,  Grc^ci  jprofessi  sunt :  Sanc- 
tam  Eomanam  Ecclesicnn  sum- 
mum  et  plenum  jprimatum  et 
jprincijpatum  su/per  U7iiversam 
Ecdesiam  Catholicam  ohtinere, 
qnem  se  ah  ipso  Domino  in 
heato  Petro,  Ajpostolorum  jprin- 
cijpe  sive  vertice,  cujus  Bomanus 
Pontifex  est  successor,  cum  po- 
testatis  jplenitudiiie  recepisse  ve- 
raciter  et  humiliter  recognoscit ; 
et  sicut  pros,  cceteris  tenetur  fidei 
mritatem  defender e,  sic  et,  si 
quce  de  fide  suhortce  fuerint 
qucestiones,  suo  debent  judicio 
definiri.  Florentimim  denique 
Concilium  definivit :  Pontificem 
Pomanum,  verum  Christi  Vi- 
carium,  totiusque  Ecclesice  caput 
et  omnium  Christianorum  pa- 
trem  ac  doctorem  existere ;  et 
ipsi  in  heato  Petro  pascendi,  re- 
gendi  ac  guhernandl  universalem 


siring,  therefore,  not  to  be  in  the> 
least  degree  separated  from  the 
faith  and  doctrine  of  that  See,  we 
hope  that  we  may  deserve  to  be  in 
the  one  communion,  which  the 
Apostolic  See  preaches,  in  which 
is  the  entire  and  trne  solidity;  of  the 
Christian  religion.^  And,  with  the 
approval  of  the  Second  Council  of 
Lyons,  the  Greeks  professed  that 
the  holy  Roman  Church  enjoys  su- 
preme and  full  primacy  and  pre- 
eminence over  the  whole  Catholic 
Church,  which  it  truly  and  humbly 
acknowledges  that  it  has  received 
with  the  plenitude  of  power  from 
our  Lord  himself  in  the  person  of 
blessed  Pete^*,  Prince  or  Head  of  the 
Apostles,  whose  successor  the  Ro- 
man Pontiff  is;  and  as  the  Apos- 
tolic See  is  bound  before  all  othere 
to  defend  the  truth  of  faith,  so  also, 
if  any  questions  regarding  faitli 
shall  arise,  they  must  be  defined  by 
its  judgment.^  Finally,  the  Coun- 
cil of  Florence  defined:^  That  the 
Roman  Pontiff  is  the  true  vicar  of 
Christ,  and  the  head  of  the  whole 
Church,  and  the  father  and  teacher 
of  all  Christians ;  and  that  to  him 
in  blessed  Peter  was  delivered  by 


*  From  the  Formula  of  St.  Hovmisdas,  subscribed  by  the  Fathers  of  the  Eighth  General 
Council  (Fourth  of  Constantinople),  A.D.  869  (Labbe's  Councils,  Vol.  V.  pp.  .583,  622). 

^  From  the  Acts  of  the  Fourteenth  General  Council  (Second  of  Lyons),  A.D.  1274  (Labbe, 
Vol.  XIV.  p.  51 2). 

^  From  the  Acts  of  the  Seventeenth  General  Council  of  Floi'ence,  A.D.  1438  (Labbe, 
Vol.XVIILp.526). 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


165 


Ecclesiam  a  Domino  nostro  Jesic 
Christo  jplenam  jpotestatem  tradi- 
tam  esse. 

Iluic  ;pastorali  muneri  ut  sa- 
ii^facereftt,  Frcedecessores  JVostri 
indefessam  semper  operam  dede- 
riint^  ut  salictaris  Christi  doctri- 
na  apud  omnes  terrce  jpovulos 
projpagaretur^  jparique  cur  a  vigi- 
lariont,  ut,  xibi  recepta  esset,  sin- 
cera  et  jpura  conservaretur.  Quo- 
circa  totius  orhis  AntistiteSy  nunc 
singulis  nunc  in  Synodis  congre- 
gatiy  longam  ecclesiarum  consue- 
tudinem  et  antigucB  regulcB  for- 
mam  sequentes,  ea  prmsertim  pe- 
ricula,  quce  in  negotiis  fidei  emer- 
gehant,  ad  hanc  Sedeni  Ajpostoli- 
cam  retulerunf,  ut  ihi  jpotissi- 
mitm  resarcirentur  damna  fidei, 
ubi  fides  non  potest  sentire  de- 
fectum. Homani  autem  Ponti- 
ficis,  prout  temporum  et  rerum 
conditio  suadehat,  nunc  convoca- 
tis  oecumenicis  Conciliis  aut  ex- 
plorata  Ecclesice  per  orhem  dis- 
perscB  sententia,  nunc  per  Syno- 
dos  particulares,  nunc  aliis,  quce 
dlvina  suppeditdbat  provide7itia, 
adhibitis  auxiliis,  ea  tenenda  de- 


oiir  Lord  Jesns  Christ  the  full 
power  of  feeding,  ruling,  and  gov- 
erning the  whole  Church.^ 

To  satisfy  this  pastoral  duty,  oar 
predecessors  ever  made  unwearied 
efforts  that  the  salutary  doctrine  of 
Christ  might  J^e  propagated  among 
all  the  nations  of  the  earth,  and 
with  equal  care  watched  that  it 
might  be  preserved  genuine  and 
pure  where  it  had  been  received. 
Therefore  the  Bishops  of  the  whole 
world,  now  singly,  now  assembled 
in  Synod,  following  the  long-estab- 
lished custom  of  churclies,^  and 
the  form  of  the  ancient  rule,^  sent 
word  to  this  Apostolic  See  of  those 
dangers  especially  which  sprang  up 
in  matters  of  faith,  that  there  the 
losses  of  faith  might  be  most  effect- 
ually repaired  w^here  the  faith  can 
not  fail.*  And  the  Roman  Pontiffs, 
according  to  the  exigencies  of  times 
and  circumstances,  sometimes  as- 
sembling oecumenical  Councils,  or 
asking  for  the  mind  of  the  Church 
scattered  throughout  the  world, 
sometimes  by  particular  Synods, 
sometimes  using  otlier  helps  which 
Divine   Providence   supplied,  de- 


^  John  xxi.  15-17. 

"  From  a  letter  of  St.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  to  Pope  St.  Celestine  I.,  A.D.  422  (Vol.  VI. 
Part  II.  p.  3G,  Paris  edition  of  1638). 

^  From  a  Kescript  of  St.  Innocent  I.  to  tlie  Council  of  Milevis,  A.D.  402  (Labbe,  Vol.  III. 
p.  47).  4 

*  From  a  letter  of  St.  Bernard  to  Pope  Innocent  II.  A.D.  1130  (Epist.  191,  Vol.  IV.  p.  433, 
Paris  edition  of  1742). 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


finiverxmt^  qucE  sacris  Bcrijpturis 
et  apostolicis  traditionihus  con- 
sentanea,  Deo  adjutore,  cognove- 
rant.  Neqxic  enim  Petri  succes- 
sorihus  Bjpiritus  8anctus  joromis- 
siis  esf,^  xit  €0  revelante  novam 
doctrinam  jpatefacerent,  sed  \it, 
eo  assist ente^  traditam  jper  Ajoos- 
tolos  revelationem  seu  fidei  de- 
jpositum  sancte  custodirent  et 
fideliter  exporter  ent.  Quorum 
quidevi  a/postolicam  doctrinam 
omnes  xenerahiles  Patres  am- 
jplexi  et  sancti  doctores  ortho- 
doxi  renerati  atqite  secuti  sunt ; 
jplenissime  scientes^  hanc  sancti 
Petri  Sedem  ah  07nni  semjper 
err  ore  illibatain  jpermanere^  se- 
cundum Domini  Salvatoris  nos- 
tri  divinam  jyollicitationem  di- 
scipulorxim  suorum  _7^r^?^c^^^  fac- 
tam :  Ego  rogavi  jpro  te,  ut  non 
dejiciat  fides  tua,  et  tu  ali- 
quando  conversus  confirma  fra- 
ires  tuos. 

HoC'  igitur  veritatis  et  fidei 
numquam  deficientis  charisma 
Petro  ej usque' in  hac  Cathedra 
successorihus  divinitus  collatum 
est,  ut  excelso  sua  munere  in  om- 
nium salutem  fungerentur,  ut 
universus  Christi  grex  per  eos 
ah  erroris  venenosa  esca  aversus, 
ccelestjs   doctrincB  pahulo    nutri- 


fined  as  to  be  held  those  things 
which  with  the  help  of  God  they 
had  recognized  as  conformable  with 
the  sacred  Scriptures  and  Apos- 
tolic traditions.  For  the  Ilblj  Spirit 
was  not  promised  to  the  successors 
of  Peter,  that  by  his  revelation  they 
might  make  known  new  doctrine ; 
but  that  by  his  assistance  they  might 
inviolably  keep  and  faithfully  ex- 
pound the  revelation  or  deposit  of 
faith  delivered  through  the  Apos-  h 
ties.  And,  indeed,  all  the  venerable 
Fathers  have  embraced,  and  the 
holy  orthodox  doctore  have  vener- 
ated and  followed,  their  Apostolic 
doctrine ;  knowing  most  fully  that 
this  See  of  holy  Peter  remains  ever 
free  from  all  blemish  of  error  ac- 
cording to  the  divine  promise  of 
the  Lord  our  Saviour  made  to  the 
Prince  of  his  disciples:  'I  have 
prjiyed  for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail 
not,  and,  when  thou  art  converted, 
confirm  thy  brethren.'  ^ 

Tliis  gift,  then,  of  truth  and 
never-failing  faith  was  conferred  . 
by  heaven  upon  Peter  and  his  suc- 
cessors in  this  chair,  that  they  miglit 
perform  their  high  office  for  the 
salvation  of  all;  that  the  whole 
flock  of  Christ,  kept  away  by  them 
from  the  poisonous  food  of  error, 
might  be  nourished  with  the  pas- 


^  Luke  xxii.  32.    See  also  the  Acts  of  the  Sixth  General  Council,  A.D.  080  (Labbe,  Vol. 
VII.  p.  659). 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


167 


Tetw\  ut,  suhlata   schismatis   oc- 
casioned Ecclesia    iota   una   con- 
servaretur,  atque  sua  fund  amen 
to  innixa,  firma  adversus  inferi 
jportas  consisteret. 

At  vero  cum  hac  ijpsa  oetate, 
qua  salutifera  A^ostolici  mime- 
ris  efficacia  vel  maxime  requiri 
tur,  nan  ^auci  inveniantur^  qui 
illius  auctoritati  ohtrectant ;  ne- 
cessai'ium  omnino  esse  censemus, 
jprcerogativam,  quam  imigenitus 
Dei  Filius  cum  summo  jpasto- 
rali  officio  conjungere  dignatus 
est,  solemniter  asserere, 

Itaque  Nos  traditioni  a  fidei 
Christianm  exordio  jperceptoe  fide- 
liter  inhcerendo,  ad  Dei  Salva- 
to7'is  nostri  gloriam,  religionis 
CatJiolicoe.  exaltationem  et  Chris- 
tianoTum,  poj)ulorum  salutem, 
sacro  ajpprohante  Concilio,  doce- 
mus  et  divinitus  revelatum  do- 
gm.a  esse  definimus :  JRomanum. 
Pontificem,  cum-  ex  Cathedra  lo- 
quitur, id  est,  cum  omnium 
Christianorum  ^astoris  et  docto- 
ris  Tnunere  fungens  jpro  supre- 
ma  sua  Ajpostolica  auctoritate 
doctrinam  de  fide  vel  moribus 
ah  imiversa  Ecclesia  tenendam 
definit,  jper  assistentiam  divi- 
nam,  ipsi  i?i  heato  Petro  jpro- 
missam,  ea  infallihilitate  jpol- 
lere,     qua     divhius     Redemjptor 


ture  of  heavenly  doctrine ;  that  the 
occasion  of  schism  being  removed, 
the  whole  Church  might  be  kept 
one,  and,  resting  on  its  foundation, 
might  stand  firm  against  the  gates 
of  hell. 

But  since  in  this  very  age,  in 
which  the  salutary  eflBcacy  of  the 
Apostolic  office  is  most  of  all  re-  ' 
quired,  not  a  few  are  found  who  \ 
take  away  from  its  authority,  we 
judge  it  altogether  necessary  sol- 
emnly to  assert  the  prerogative 
which  the  only-begotten  Son  of 
God  vouchsafed  to  join  with  the 
supreme  pastoral  office. 

Therefore  faithfully  adhering  to 
the  tradition  received  from  the  be- 
ginning of  the  Christian  faith,  for 
the  glory  of  God  our  Saviour,  the 
exaltation  of  the  Catholic  religion, 
and  the  salvation  of  Christian  peo- 
ple, the  sacred  Council  approving, 
we  teach  and  define  that  it  is  a 
dogma  divinely  revealed :  that  the 
Roman  PontifP,  when  he  speaks  ex 
cathedra,  thi. "  is,  when  in  discharge 
of  the  office  oi  pastor  and  doctor 
of  all  Christians,  by  virtue  of  his 
supreme  Apostolic  authority,  he 
defines  a  doctrine  regarding  faith 
or  morals  to  be  held  by  the  uni- 
versal Church,  by  the  divine  assist- 
ance promised  to  him  in  blessed 
Peter,  is  possessed  of  that  infalli- 
bility with  which  the  divine  Ee- 


les 


DOGMATIC  DECREES  OF  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


Ecclesiam  suam  in  definienda 
doctrina  de  fide  vel  moribus  in- 
structam  esse  voluit ;  ideoque 
ejusmodi  Romani  Pontificis  de- 
finitio7ies  ex  sese,  non  aiUem  ex 
consensu  Ecclesice,  irreformahiles 
esse. 

Si  qitis  autem  huic  Nostroe, 
definitioni  contradicere,  quod 
Deus  avertat,  jpvoisumjpsevit : 
anathema  sit. 

Datum  Bomce,  in  jpiihlica  Ses- 
sione  in  Vaticana  Basilica  so- 
lemniter  celehrata^  anno  Incarna- 
tio7iis  DominiccB  millesimo  octin- 
gentesimo  sejptuagesimo^  die  de- 
cima  octava  Julii.  Pontificatus 
Nostri  anno  mgesimo  quinto. 


deemer  willed  that  his  Church 
should  be  endowed  for  definiiio: 

o 

doctrine  regarding  faith  or  morals ; 
and  that  therefore  such  definitions 
of  the  Eoman  Pontiff  are  irreform- 
able^  of  themselves,  and  not  from 
the  consent  of  the  Church. 

But  if  any  one — which  may  God 
avert — presume  to  contradict  this 
our  definition :  let  him  be  anathe- 
ma. 

Given  at  Eome  in  public  Session 
solemnly  held  in  the  Vatican  Basil- 
ica in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  sev- 
enty, on  the  eighteenth  day  of  July, 
in  the  twenty-fifth  year  of  our  Pon- 
tificate. 


'  That  is,  in  the  words  used  by  Pope  Nicholas  I.,  note  13,  and  in  the  Synod  of  Quedlin- 
bnrg,  A.D.  1085,  'It  is  allowed  to  none  to  revise  its  judgment,  and  to  sit  in  judgment  upon 
what  it  has  judged'  (Labbe,  Vol.  XII.  p.  679). 


VATICAN  ISM: 


AN  ANSWER  TO 


REPROOFS  AND  REPLIES. 


BY  THE 


RIGHT    HON.  W.  E.  GLADSTONE,  M.P., 

If 

AUTHOR  OF  "THE  VATICAN   DECREES  IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE." 


NEW    YORK: 
HARPER    &    BROTHERS,    PUBLISHERS, 

FRANKLINSQUARE. 

1875- 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

I.  INTRODUCTION 5 

The  Replies  which  have  appeared  on  this  Occasion.  The  Insult. 
Evidences  of  Personal  Loyalty  all  that  could  be  wished.  Dr. 
Newman.  His  Remarkable  Admissions.  Evidences  as  to  the  Char- 
acter AND  Tendencies  of  Vaticanism  :  most  unsatisfactory. 

II.  THE  RUSTY  TOOLS.     THE  SYLLABUS U 

1.  What  are  its  Contents  ? 16 

2.  What  is  its  Authority  ? 23 

in.  THE   VATICAN    COUNCIL    AND    THE    INFALLIBILITY    OF   THE 

POPE 27 

Breach  with  History,  No.  1.  From  the  Opinions  and  Declarations 
of  the  Roman  Catholics  of  the  United  States  for  Two  Centuries. 

IV.  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL   AND    THE    INFALLIBILITY  •  OF   THE 

TOFE— continued. ." 38 

Breach  with  History,  No.  2.  From  the  History  of  the  Council  of 
Constance.     Gallicanism. 

V.  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL  AND  OBEDIENCE  TO  THE  POPE 47 

VL  REVIVED  CLAIMS  OF  THE  POPE 50 

1.  To  the  Deposing  Power 50 

2.  To  the  Use  of  Force 55 

VIL  WARRANT  OF  ALLEGIANCE  ACCORDING  TO  THE  VATICAN 57 

1 .  Its  Alleged  Superiority 57 

2.  Its  Real  Flaws 59 

3.  Alleged  Non-interference  of  the  Popes  for  Two  Hundred  Years.     63 

VIIL  ON  THE  INTRINSIC  NATURE  AND  CONDITIONS  OF  THE  PAPAL 

INFALLIBILITY  DECREED  IN  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL GG 

IX.  CONCLUSION 78 

APPENDICES 89 


UiSriVERSITT 


VATICANISM 


•  I.   iNTRODrCTION. 

The  number  and  qnalitj  of  the  antagonists  who  have  been  drawn 
into  the  field  on  the  occasion  offered  by  my  tract  on  the  Vatican  De- 
crees/ and  the  interest  in  the  subject  which  has  been  manifested  by 
the  pubhc  of  England  and  of  many  other  countries,  appear  to  show  that 
it  was  not  inopportune.  The  only  special  claim  to  attention  with  which 
I  could  invest  it  was  this,  that  for  thirty  years  I  had  striven  hard, 
together  with  others,  to  secure  a  full  measure  of  civil  justice  for  my 
Eoman  Catholic  fellow-countrymen,  and  that  I  still  retained  the  con- 
victions by  which  these  efforts  had  been  prompted.  Knowing  well 
the  general  indisposition  of  the  English  mind,  amid  the  pressing  de- 
mands of  our  crowded  daily  life,  to  touch  any  subject  comparatively 
abstract  and  remote,  I  was  not  surprised  when  many  journals  of  great 
influence,  reflecting  this  indisposition,  condemned  the  publication  of 
the  Tract,  and  inspired  Eoman  authorities  among  us  with  the  vain 
conception  that  the  discussion  was  not  practical  or  significant.^  In 
Eome  itself,  a  different  view  was  taken ;  and  the  veiled  prophets  be- 
hind the  throne,  by  whom  the  Latin  Church  is  governed,  brought 
about  its  condemnation  as  blasphemous,  without  perusal,  from  the  lips 
of  the  Holy  Father.^     The  object,  probably,  was  at  once  to  prevent  or 

1  Appendix  A. 

^  For  example :  '  The  various  organs  of  the  press,  with  the  shrewd  political  sense  for 
which  they  are  conspicuous,  without  any  possible  collusion,  extinguished  its  political  import 
in  a  single  morning.' — Bishop  Vaughari's  Pastoral  Letter,  p.  5. 

^  The  declaration  of  non  avenu,  which,  after  a  brief  interval,  followed  the  announcement 
of  the  condemnation,  appeared  upon  some  subsequent  discussion  to  be  negatived  by  the  evi- 


6  VATICANISM. 

neutralize  avowals  of  sympathy  from  Eoman  Catholic  quarters.  It 
may  have  been  with  a  like  aim  that  a  number  of  Prelates  at  once  en- 
tered, though  by  no  means  with  one  voice,  into  the  lists.  At  length 
the  great  name  of  Dr.  Kewman  was  announced,  and  he  too  has  re- 
plied to  me,  and  explained  himself,  in  a  work  to  w^iich  I  shall  present- 
ly refer.  Even  apart  from  the  sjpolia  ojphna  of  this  transcendent 
champion,  I  do  not  undervalue  the  ability,  accomplishments,  and  dis- 
cipline of  that  division  of  the  Roman  Army  which  confronts  our 
Church  and  nation.  Besides  its  supply  from  indigenous  sources,  it 
lias  been  strangely  but  very  largely  recruited  from  the  ranks  of  the 
Englisli  Church,  and  her  breasts  have,  for  thirty  years,  been  pierced 
mainly  by  children  wliom  they  had  fed. 

In  these  replies,  of  w^liich  the  large  majority  adopt  without  reserve 
the  Ultramontane  hypothesis,  it  is  most  commonly  alleged  that  I  have 
insulted  the  Roman  Catholics  of  these  kingdoms.  Dr.  Newman,  averse 
to  the  use  of  harsh  words,  still  announces  (p.  3)  that  '  heavy  charges 
have  been  made  against  the  Catholics  of  England.'  Bishop  Clifford, 
in  a  pastoral  letter  of  which  I  gladly  acknowledge  the  equitable,  re- 
strained, and  Christian  spirit,  says  I  have  proclaimed  that  since  the 
Vatican  Decrees  were  piiblished  'it  is  no  longer  possible  for  English 
Catholics  to  pay  to  their  temporal  sovereign  a  full  and  undivided  alle- 
giance.' 

I  am  obliged  to  assert  that  not  one  of  the  writers  against  me  has 
apprehended  or  stated  with  accuracy  my  principal  charge.  Except  a 
prospective  reference  to  '  converts,'  the  subject  (to  speak  teclipically) 
of  all  my  propositions  is  the  word  '  Rome ;'  and  with  reference  to 
these  '  converts,'  I  speak  of  what  they  suffer,  not  of  what  they  do.  It  is 
an  entire,  and  even  a  gross  error  to  treat  all  affirmations  about  Rome 
as  equivalent  to  affirmations  about  British  subjects  of  the  Roman  com- 
munion. They  may  adopt  the  acts  of  Rome :  the  question  was  and  is, 
w^hetlier  they  do.  I  have  done  nothing  to  leave  this  question  open  to 
doubt ;  for  I  have  paraphrased  my  monosyllable  '  Rome '  by  the  wwds 
'  the  Papal  chair,  and  its  ad visei-s  and  abettors '  (p.  9 ;  Am.  ed.  p.  11).  Un- 
able as  I  am  to  attenuate  the  charges,  on  the  contrary  bound  rather  to 
plead  guilty  to  the  fault  of  having  understated  them,  I  am  on  that  ac- 

dence.  But  such  declarations  are,  I  conceive,  well  understooil  in  Rome  to  depend,  like  an 
Englisli  '-  not  at  home,''  upon  convenience. 


INTRODUCTION.  7 

count  the  more  anxious  tliat  their  aim  shall  be  clearly  understood. 
First,  then,  I  must  again  speak  plainly,  and  I  fear  hardly,  of  that  sys- 
tem, political  rather  than  religious,  which  in  Germany  is  well  termed 
Vaticanism.  It  would  be  affectation  to  exclude  from  my  language  and 
meaning  its  contrivers  and  conscious  promoters.  But  here  in  my  mind, 
as  well  as  in  my  page,  any  thing  approaching  to  censure  stops.  The 
Vatican  Decrees  do,  in  the  strictest  sense,  establish  for  the  Pope  a  su- 
preme command  over  loyalty  and  civil  duty.  To  the  vast  majority  of 
Eoman  Catholics  they  are,  and  in  all  likelihood  will  long  in  their  care- 
fully enveloped  meaning  remain,  practically  unknown.  Of  that  small 
minority  who  have  spoken  or  fitted  themselves  to  speak,  a  portion  re- 
ject them.  Another  portion  receive  them  with  an  express  reserve,  to 
me  perfectly  satisfactory,  against  all  their  civil  consequences.  Another 
portion  seem  to  suspend  their  judgment  until  it  is  determined  what  is 
a  free  Council,  what  is  moral  unanimity,  what  are  declarations  excathe- 
drdy  whether  there  has  been  a  decisive  and  binding  promulgation  so  as 
to  create  a  law,  and  whether  the  claim  for  an  undue  obedience  need  be 
considered  until  some  act  oi  undue  obedience  is  asked.  A  very  large 
class,  as  it  seems  to  me,  think  they  receive  these  Decrees,  and  do  not. 
They  are  involved  in  inconsistency,  and  that  inconsistency  is  dangerous. 
So  I  presume  they  would  tell  me  that  when  I  recite  in  the  Creed  the 
words, '  I  believe  in  the  Holy  Catholic  Church,'  I  am  involved  in  in- 
consistency, and  my  inconsistency  is  dangerous.  To  treat  this  as  a 
*  heavy  charge '  is  surely  inaccurate ;  to  call  it  an  insult  is  (forgive  the 
word)  preposterous. 

Not  even  against  men  who  voted  under  pressure,  against  their  better 
mind,  for  these  deplorable  Decrees — nay,  not  even  against  those  who 
resisted  them  and  now  enforce  them — is  it  for  me  to  utter  a  word  of 
censure.  The  just  appreciation  of  their  difficulties,  the  judgment  of 
their  conduct,  lies  in  a  region  far  too  high  for  me.  To  assail  the  sys- 
tem is  the  Alpha  and  Omega  of  my  desire ;  and  it  is  to  me  matter  of 
regret  that  I  am  not  able  to  handle  it  as  it  deserves  without  reflecting 
upon  the  persons,  be  they  who  they  may,  that  have  brought  it  into  the 
world ;  have  sedulously  fed  it  in  its  weakness ;  have  reared  it  up  to  its 
baleful  maturity;  have  forced  it  upon  those  who  now  force  it  upon 
others;  are  obtaining  for  it  from  day  to  day  fresh  command  over  the 
pulpit,  the  press,  the   confessional,  the  teacher's  chair,  the  bishop's 


8  VATICANISM. 

throne ;  so  that  every  father  of  a  family,  and  every  teacher  in  the  Latin 
communion,  shall,  as  he  dies,  be  replaced  by  some  one  more  deeply 
imbued  with  the  new  color,  until  at  the  last,  in  that  moiety  of  the 
whole  Christian  family,  nothing  shall  remain  except  an  Asian  mon- 
archy ;  nothing  but  one  giddy  height  of  despotism,  and  one  dead  level 
of  religious  subserviency. 

But  even  of  the  most  responsible  abettors  of  that  system  I  desire 
once  for  all  to  say  that  I  do  not  presume  in  any  way  to  impeach  their 
sincerity ;  and  that,  as  far  as  I  am  acquainted  with  their  personal  char- 
acters, I  should  think  it  great  presumption  to  place  myself  in  compar- 
ison or  competition  with  any  of  them. 

So  much  for  insult  Much  has  also  been  said  of  my  ignorance  and 
incapacity  in  theology  ;*  a  province  whic-h  I  had  entered  only  at  the 
points  where  it  crossed  the  border  of  the  civil  domain.  Censures  of 
this  kind  have  great  weight  when  they  follow  upon  demonstration 
given  of  errors  committed  by  the  person  who  is  the  object  of  them ; 
but  they  can  have  very  little  when  they  are  used  as  substitutes  for  such 
a  demonstration.  In  the  'absence  of  such  proof,  they  can  rank  no 
higher  than  as  a  mere  artifice  of  controversy.  I  have  endeavored  to 
couch  all  m}^  positive  statements  in  language  of  moderation,  and  not 
one  among  them  that  appertains  to  the  main  line  of  argument  has  been 
shaken.  As  to  the  use  of  rhetoric,  another  matter  of  complaint,  I  cer- 
tainly neither  complain  of  strong  language  used  against  me,  nor  do  I 
think  that  it  can  properly  be  avoided,  when  the  matters  of  fact,  care- 
fully ascertained  and  stated,  are  such  that  it  assists  toward  a  compre- 
hension of  their  character  and  consequences.  At  the  same  time,  in  the 
use  of  such  language,  earnestness  should  not  be  allowed  to  degenerate 
into  dogmatism,  and  to  qualify  is  far  more  pleasant  than  to  employ  it. 

With  so  much  of  preface,  I  proceed  to  execute  my  twofold  duty. 
One  of  its  branches  is  to  state  in  what  degree  I  conceive  the  immedi- 
ate purpose  of  my  Expostulation  to  have  been  served ;  and  the  other, 
to  examine  whether  the  allegations  of  antagonists  have  dislodged  my 
arguments  from  their  main  positions,  or,  on  the  contrary,  have  con- 

*  For  example:  by  Archbishop  Manning,  pp.  13,  177.  Bishop  Ullathorne,  Letter,  p.  10. 
Exposition  Unraveled,  p.  68.  Bishop  Vaughan,  p.  37.  Month,  December,  1874,  p.  497. 
Monk  of  St.  Augustine,  p.  10.  With  these  legitimate  reproaches  is  oddly  combined,  on  the 
part  of  the  Archbishop,  and,  apparently,  of  Bishop  Ullathorne,  a  snpposition  that  Dr.  Dijllin- 
ger  was  in  some  manner  concerned  in  my  tract  on  the  Vatican  Decrees.     See  Appendix  B. 


INTRODUCTION.  6 

firmed  them ;  and  to  re-state — nay,»even  to  enlarge — those  positions 
accordingly. 

In  considering  the  nature  of  the  declarations  on  civil  duty  which 
have  been  elicited,  it  will  not  be  thought  unnatural  if  I  begin  with  the 
words  of  one  to  whom  age  and  fame  combine  in  assigning  the  most 
conspicuous  place — I  mean  Dr.  Newman. 

Of  this  most  remarkable  man  I  must  pause  to  speak  a  word.  In  my 
opinion,  his  secession  from  the  Church  of  England  has  never  yet  been 
estimated  among  us  at  any  thing  like  the  full  amount  of  its  calamitous 
importance.  It  has  been  said  that  the  world  does  not  know  its  great- 
est men ;  neither,  I  will  add,  is  it  aware  of  the  power  and  weight  car- 
ried by  the  words  and  by  the  acts  of  those  among  its  greatest  men 
whom  it  does  know.  The  Ecclesiastical  historian  will  perhaps  here- 
after judge  that  this  secession  w^as  a  much  greater  event  than  the  great 
event  of  the  partial  secession  of  John  "Wesley,  the  only  case  of  loss  suf- 
fered by  the  Church  of  England,  since  the  Keformation,  which  can  be 
at  all  compared  with  it  in  magnitude.  I  do  not  refer  to  its  effect  upon 
the  mere  balance  of  schools  or  parties  in  the  Church ;  that  is  an  infe- 
rior question.  I  refer  to  its  effect  upon  the  state  of  positive  belief,  and 
the  attitude  and  capacities  of  the  religious  mind  of  England.  Of  this, 
thirty  years  ago,  he  had  the  leadership  :  an  office  and  pow^  from  which 
none  but  himself  could  eject  him. 

"Quis  desiderio  sit  pudor  aut  modus 
Tarn  cari  capitis?" 

It  has  been  his  extraordinary,  perhaps  unexampled  case,  at  a  critic- 
al period,  first  to  give  to  the  religious  thought  of  his  time  and  country 
the  most  powerful  impulse  which  for  a  long  time  it  had  received  from 
any  individual;  and  then  to  be  the  main  involuntary  cause  of  disor- 
ganizing it  in  a  manner  as  remarkable,  and  breaking  up  its  forces  into 
a  multitude  of  not  only  severed  but  conflicting  bands. 

My  duty  calls  me  to  deal  freely  with  his  Letter  to  the  Duke  of  Nor- 
folk. But  in  doing  so,  I  can  never  lose  the  recollection  of  the  perhaps 
ill-appreciated  greatness  of  his  early  life  and  works.  I  do  not  presume 
to  intrude  into  the  sanctuary  of  his  present  thoughts ;  but,  by  reason  of 
that  life  and  those  works,  it  seems  to  me  that  there  is  something  we 
must  look  upon  with  the  affection  with  which  Americans  regard  those 
Englishmen  who  strove  and  wrought  before  the  colonization  or  sever- 


10  VATICANISM. 

ance  of  their  country.  Nay,  it  tnay  not  be  J3resumptiious  to  say  we 
have  a  possessory  right  in  the  better  half  of  him.  All  he  produces  is 
and  must  be  most  notable.  But  has  he  outrun,  has  he  overtaken  the 
greatness  of  the  ^  History  of  the  Arians '  and  of  tlie  *  Parochial  Ser- 
mons,' those  indestructible  classics  of  English  theology  ? 

And  again,  I  thankfully  record  the  admissions  which  such  integrity, 
combined  with  such  acuteness,  has  not  been  able  to  withhold.  They 
are  of  the  greatest  importance  to  the  vindication  of  my  argument.  In 
my  reading  of  his  work,  w^e  have  his  authority  for  the  following  state- 
ments :  That  Eoman  Catholics  are  bound  to  be  '  as  loyal  as  other  sub- 
jects of  the  State ;'  and  that  Rome  is  not  to  give  to  the  civil  power 
*  trouble  or  alarm '  (p.  7).  That  the  assurances  given  by  the  Roman 
Catholic  Bishops  in  1825-26  have  not  been  strictly  fulfilled  (pp.  12-14). 
That  Roman  Catholics  can  not  wonder  that  statesmen  should  feel  them- 
selves  aggrieved  (p.  17).  That  Popes  are  sometimes  in  the  WTong,  and 
sometimes  to  be  resisted,  even  in  matters  affecting  the  government  and 
welfare  of  the  Church  (pp.  33, 34).  That  the  Deposing  power  is  defen- 
sible only  upon  condition  of  '  the  common  consent  of  peoples '  (p.  37). 
That  if  England  supported  Italy  against  any  violent  attempt  to  restore 
the  Pope  to  his  throne,  Roman  Catholics  could  offer  no  opposition  but 
such  as  the  constitution  of  the  country  allows  (p.  49).  That  a  soldier 
or  a  sailor  employed  in  a  war  which  (in  his  private  judgment,  be  it  ob- 
served) he  did  not  think  unjust,  ought  not  to  retire  from  the  prosecu- 
tion of  that  war  on  the  command  of  the  Pope  (p.  52).  That  conscience 
is  the  aboriginal  vicar  of  Christ  (p.  57) :  e{?i  iuchtiges  Wort !  and  Dr. 
Newman,  at  an  ideal  public  dinner,  will  drink  to  conscience  first,  and 
the  Pope  afterwards  (p.  ^^).  That  one  of  the  great  dangers  of  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  Church  is  to  be  found  in  the  exaggerated  language  and 
proceedings  allowed  among  its  own  members  (pp.  4,  80,  94, 125),  and 
that  there  is  much  malaria  in  the  court  of  Rome.  That  a  definition 
by  a  general  Council,  which  the  Pope  approves,  is  not  absolutely  bind- 
ing thereby,  but  requires  a  moral  unanimity,  and  a  subsequent  recep- 
tion by  the  Church  (pp.  96-98).  That  antecedently  to  the  theological 
definitions  of  1854  and  1870,  an  opponent  might  have  '  fairly  said '  '  it 
might  appear  that  there  w^ere  no  sufficient  historical  grounds  in  behalf 
of  either  of  them ;'  and  that  the  confutation  of  such  an  opponent  is 
now  to  be  sought  only  in  ^the  fact  of  the  definition  being  made^ 


INTRODUCTION.  H 

(p.  107).  I  sball  indulge  in  none  of  the  taunts,  which  Dr.  Newman  an- 
ticipates, on  the  want  of  correspondence  between  him  and  other  Apol- 
ogists ;  and  I  shall  leave  it  to  theologians  to  examine  the  bearing  of 
these  admissions  on  the  scheme  of  Vaticanism,  and  on  other  parts  of 
his  own  work.  It  is  enough  for  me  to  record  that,  even  if  they  stood 
alone,  they  would  suffice  to  justify  the  publication  which  has  given  '  oc- 
casion '  for  them ;  and  that  on  the  point  of  Dr.  Newman's  practical 
reservation  of  his  command  over  his  own  'loyalty  and  civil  duty,'  they 
are  entirely  satisfactory.  As  regards  this  latter  point,  the  Pastoral  of 
Bishop  Clifford  is  also  every  thing  that  can  be  wished.  Among  lay- 
men who  declare  they  accept  the  Decrees  of  1870, 1  must  specially 
make  the  same  avowal  as  to  my  esteemed  friend  Mr.  De  Lisle ;  and 
again,  as  to  Mr.  Stores  Smith,  who  regards  me  with  '  silent  and  intense 
contempt,'  but  who  does  not  scruple  to  write  as  follows : 

'  If  this  country  decide  to  go  to  war,  for  any  cause  whatsoever,  I  will  hold  my  own  opinion 
as  to  the  justice  or  policy  of  that  war,  but  I  will  do  all  that  in  me  lies  to  bring  victory  to  the 
British  standard.  If  there  be  any  Parliamentary  or  Municipal  election,  and  any  Priest  or 
Bishop,  backed  by  Archbishop  and  the  Pope,  advise  me  to  take  a  certain  line  of  action,  and 
I  conceive  that  the  opposite  course  is  necessary  for  the  general  weal  of  my  fellow-countrymen, 
I  shall  take  the  opposite.'  ^ 

When  it  is  considered  that  Dr.  Newman  is  like  the  sun  in  the  in- 
tellectual hemisphere  of  Anglo-Romanism,  and  that,  besides  those  ac- 
ceptors of  the  Decrees  who  write  in  the  same  sense,  various  Roman 
Catholics  of  weight  and  distinction,  well  known  to  represent  the  views 
of  many  more,  have  held  equally  outspoken  and  perhaps  more  consist- 
ent language,  I  can  not  but  say  that  the  immediate  purpose  of  my  ap- 
peal has  been  attained,  in  so  far  that  the  loyalty  of  our  Roman  Cath- 
olic fellow-subjects  in  the  mass  is  evidently  untainted  and  secure. 

It  would  be  unjust  to  Archbishop  Manning,  on  whose  opinions,  in 
many  points,  I  shall  again  have  to  animadvert,  were  I  not  to  say  that 
his  declarations^  also  materially  assist  in  leading  me  to  this  conclusion  : 
an  avowal  I  am  the  more  bound  to  make,  because  I  think  the  premises 
from  which  he  draws  them  are  such  as,  if  I  were  myself  to*  accept 
them,  would  certainly  much  impair  the  guarantees  for  my  performing, 
under  all  circumstances,  the  duties  of  a  good  subject. 

This  means  that  the  poison  which  circulates  from  Rome  has  not 

'  Letter  in  Halifax  Courier  of  December  5,  1874. 
"  Archbishop  Manning,  Vatica7i  Decrees,  pp.  136-40. 


12  VATICANISM. 

been  taken  into  the  system.  Unhappily,  what  I  may  term  the  minor- 
ity among  the  Apologists  do  not  represent  the  ecclesia  docens ;  the 
silent  diffusion  of  its  influence  in  the  lay  atmosphere  ;  the  true  current 
and  aim  of  thought  in  the  Papal  Church ;  now  given  up  to  Vaticanism 
deju7'e,  and  likely,  according  to  all  human  probability,  to  come  from 
year  to  year  more  under  its  power.  And  here  again  the  ulterior  pur- 
pose of  my  Tract  has  been  thus  far  attained.  It  was  this :  To 
provide  that  if,  together  with  the  ancient  and  loyal  traditions  of  the 
body,  we  have  now  imported  among  us  a  scheme  adverse  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  human  freedom  and  in  its  essence  unfaithful  to  civil  duty, 
the  character  of  that  scheme  should  be  fully  considered  and  under- 
stood. It  is  high  time  that  the  chasm  should  be  made  visible,  severing 
it,  and  all  who  knowingly  and  thoroughly  embrace  it,  from  the  princi- 
ples which  we  had  a  right  to  believe  not  only  prevailed  among  the  Eo- 
man  Catholics  of  these  countries,  but  were  allowed  and  recognized  by 
the  authorities  of  their  Church ;  and  w^ould  continue,  therefore,  to  form 
the  basis  of  their  system,  permanent  and  undisturbed.  For  the  more 
complete  attainment  of  this  object,  I  must  now  proceed  to  gather  to- 
gether the  many  threads  of  the  controversy,  as  it  has  been  left  by  my 
numerous  opponents.  This  I  shall  do,  not  from  any  mere  call  of  spec- 
ulation or  logical  consistency,  but  for  strong  practical  reasons. 

Dr.  lls'ewman's  letter  to  the  Duke  of  Norfolk  is  of  the  highest  inter- 
est as  a  psychological  study.  Whatever  he  writes,  whether  we  agree 
with  him  or  not,  presents  to  us  this  great  attraction  as  well  as  advant- 
age, that  we  have  every  where  the  man  in  the  work,  that  his  words  are 
the  transparent  covering  of  his  nature.  If  there  be  obliquity  in  them, 
it  is  purely  intellectual  obliquity;  the  work  of  an  intellect  sharp 
enough  to  cut  the  diamond,  and  bright  as  the  diamond  which  it  cuts. 
How  rarely  it  is  found,  in  the  wayward  and  inscrutable  records  of  our 
race,  that  with  these  instruments  of  an  almost  superhuman  force  and 
subtlety,  robustness  of  character  and  energy  of  will  are  or  can  be  de- 
veloped in  the  same  extraordinary  proportions,  so  as  to  integrate  that 
structure  of  combined  thought  and  action  which  makes  life  a  moral 
whole.  '  There  are  gifts  too  large  and  too  fearful  to  be  handled  free- 
ly.'^    But  I  turn  from  an  incidental  reflection  to  observe  that  my  dut^ 

*  Dr.  Newman,  p.  127. 


INTRODUCTION.  X3 

is  to  appreciate  the  letter  of  Dr.  Newman  exclusively  in  relation  to  my 
Tract.  I  thankfully  here  record,  in  the  first  place,  the  kindliness  of 
his  tone.  If  he  has  striven  to  minimize  the  Decrees  of  the  Vatican,  I 
am  certain  he  has  also  striven  to  minimize  his  censures,  and  has  put 
words  aside  before  they  touched  his  paper,  \vhich  must  have  been  in 
his  thoughts,  if  not  upon  his  pen.  I  sum  up  this  pleasant  portion  of 
my  duty  with  the  language  of  Helen  respecting  Hector:  7raTr}p  wc, 


rjTTiOQ  ai^i. 


It  is,  in  my  opinion,  an  entire  mistake  to  suppose  that  theories  like 
those,  of  which  Eome  is  the  centre,  are  not  operative  on  the  thoughts 
and  actions  of  men.  An  army  of  teachers,  the  largest  and  the  most 
compact  in  the  world,  is  ever  sedulously  at  work  to  bring  them  into 
practice.  Within  our  own  time  they  liave  most  powerfully,  as  well  as 
most  injuriously,  altered  the  spirit  and  feeling  of  the  Roman  Church 
at  large ;  and  it  will  be  strange  indeed  if,  having  done  so  much  in  the 
last  half-century,  they  shall  effect  nothing  in  the  next.  I  must  avow, 
then,  that  I  do  not  feel  exactly  the  same  security  for  the  future  as  for 
the  present.  Still  less  do  I  feel  the  same  security  for-  other  lands  as 
for  this,  l^or  can  I  overlook  indications  which  lead  to* the  belief  that, 
even  in  this  country,  and  at  this  time,  the  proceedings  of  Vaticanism 
threaten  to  be  a  source  of  some  practical  inconvenience.  I  am  confi- 
dent that  if  a  system  so  radically  bad  is  to  be  made  or  kept  innocuous, 
the  first  condition  for  attaining  such  a  result  is  that  its  movements 
should  be  carefully  watched,  and,  above  all,  that  the  bases  on  which 
they  work  should  be  faithfully  and  unflinchingly  exposed.  Xor  can  I 
quit  this  portion  of  the  subject  without  these  remarks.  The  satis- 
factory views  of  Archbishop  Manning  on  the  present  rule  of  civil 
allegiance  have  not  prevented  him  from  giving  his  countenance 
as  a  responsible  editor  to  the  lucubrations  of  a  gentleman  who 
denies  liberty  of  conscience,  and  asserts  the  riglit  to  persecute  when 
there  is  the  power ;  a  right  wliich,  indeed,  lie  has  not  himself  dis- 
claimed. 

Nor  must  it  be  forgotten  that  the  very  best  of  all  the  declarations  we 
have  heard  from  those  who  allow  themselves  to  be  entangled  in  the 
meshes  of  the  Vatican  Decrees  are,  every  one  of  them,  uttered  subject 

*  Iliad,  xxiv.  775. 


14  ^  VATICANISM. 

to  the  condition  that,  npon  orders  from  Rome,  if  such  orders  should  is- 
sue, they  shall  be  qualified  or  retracted  or  reversed. 

'A  breath  can  unmake  them,  as  a  breath  has  made.' 

But  even  apart  from  all  this,  do  what  we  may  in  checking  external 
developments,  it  is  not  in  our  power  to  neutralize  the  mischiefs  of  the 
wanton  aggression  of  1870  upon  the  liberties — too  scanty,  it  is  excusa- 
ble to  think — which  up  to  that  epoch  had  been  allowed  to  private  Chris- 
tians in  the  Roman  communion.  Even  in  those  parts  of  Christendom 
where  the  Decrees  and  the  present  attitude  of  the  Papal  See  do  not 
produce  or  aggravate  open  broils  wdth  the  civil  power,  by  undermining 
moral  liberty  they  impair  moral  responsibility,  and  silently,  in  the  suc- 
cession of  generations  if  not  even  in  the  lifetime  of  individuals,  tend  to 
emasculate  the  vigor  of  the  mind. 

In  the  tract  on  the  Vatican  Decrees  I  passed  briefly  by  those  por- 
tions of  my  original  statement  which  most  lay  within  the  province  of 
theology,  and  dwelt  principally  on  two  main  propositions. 

I.  That  Rome  had  reproduced  for  active  service  those  doctrines  of 
former  times,  termed  by  me  '  rusty  tools,'  which  slie  was  fondly  thought 
to  have  disused.* 

II.  That  the  Pope  now  claims,  with  plenary  authority,  from  every 
convert  and  member  of  his  Church,  that  he  ^  shall  place  his  loyalty  and 
civil  duty  at  the  mercy. of  another:'  that  other  being  himself. 

These  are  the  assertions  which  I  now  hold  myself  bound  further  to 
sustain  and  prove. 

11.  The  Rusty  Tools.     The  Syllabus. 

1.  Its  Contents. 

2.  Its  Authority. 

'  With  regard  to  the  proposition  that  Rome  has  refurbished  her  *  rusty ' 
tools,  Dr.  l^ewman  says  it  was  by  these  tools  that  Europe  was  brought 
into  a  civilized  condition ;  and  thinks  it  worth  w^hile  to  ask  whether  it 
is  my  wish  that  penalties  so  sharp  and  expressions  so  high  should  be 
of  daily  use.^ 

I  may  be  allowed  to  say,  in  reply  to  the  remark  I  have  cited,  that  I 

^  Dr.  Newman,  p.  32. 


THE  RUSTY  TOOLS.  THE  SYLLABUS.  16 

have  nowhere  presumed  to  pronounce  a  general  censure  on  the  conduct 
of  the  Papacy  in  the  Middle  Ages.  That  is  a  vast  question,  reaching 
far  beyond  my  knowledge  or  capacity.  ,  I  believe  much  is  to  be  justly 
said  in  praise,  much  as  justly  in  blame.  But  I  can  not  view  the  state- 
ment that  Papal  claims  and  conduct  created  the  civilization  of  Europe 
as  other  than  thoroughly  unhistorical  and  one-sided ;  as  resting  upon  a 
narrow  selection  of  evidence,  upon  strong  exaggeration  of  what  that 
evidence  imports,  and  upon  an  'invincible  ignorance'  as  to  all  the 
rest. 

Many  things  may  have  been  suited,  or  not  unsuited,  to  rude  times 
and  indeterminate  ideas  of  political  right,  the  reproduction  of  which  is 
at  the  least  strange,  perhaps  even  monstrous.  We  look  back  with  in- 
terest and  respect  upon  our  early  fire-arms  as  they  rest  peacefully  ranged 
upon  the  wall;  but  we  can  not  think  highly  of  the  judgment  which 
would  recommend  their  use  in  modern  warfare.  As  for  those  weapons 
which  had  been  consigned  to  obscurity  and  rust,  my  answer  to  Dr. 
IN'ewman's  question  is  that  they  should  have  slept  forever,  till  perchance 
.some  reclaiming  plow  of  the  future  should  disturb  them. 

'  .  .  .  quum  finibas  illis 
Agricola,  incurvo  terrain  molitus  aratro, 
Exesa  inveniet  scabra  rubigine  pila.'  ^ 

As  to  the  proof  of  my  accusation,  it  appeared  tq  me  that  it  might  be 
sufiiciently  given  in  a  summary  but  true  account  ^  of  some  important 
portions  of  the  Encyclica  of  December  8,  1864,  and  especially  of  the 
accompanying  Syllabus  of  the  same  date. 

The  replies  to  the  five  or  six  pages  in  which  I  dealt  with  this  subject 
have  so  swollen  as  to  reach  fifteen  or  twenty  times  the  bulk.  I  am 
sorry  that  they  involve  me  in  the  necessity  of  entering  upon  a  few 
pages  of  detail  which  may  be  wearisome.  But  I  am  bound  to  vindicate 
my  good  faith  and  care,  where  a  failure  in  either  involves  results  of 
real  importance.     These  results  fall  under  the  two  following  heads : 

(l.J  The  Syllabus ;  what  is  its  language  ? 

(2.)  The  Syllabus ;  what  is  its  authority  ? 

^  Virgil,  Georgics,  i.  493. 

^  Erroneously  called  by  some  of  my  antagonists  a  translation,  and  then  condemned  as  a 
bad  translation.  But  I  know  of  no  recipe  for  translating  into  less  than  half  the  bulk  of  the 
original. 


16  VATICANISM. 

As  to  the  language, I  liave  justly  represented  it:  as  to  its  authority, 
my  statement  is  not  above,  but  beneath  the  mark. 

1.  The  Contents  of  the  Syllabus. 

My  representation  of  the  language  of  the  Syllabus  has  been  assailed 
in  strong  terms.  I  proceed  to  defend  it :  observing,  however,  that  my 
legitimate  object  was  to  state  in  popular  terms  the  effect  of  propositions 
more  or  less  technical  and  scholastic;  and,  secondly,  that  I  did  not 
present  each  and  every  proposition  for  a  separate  disapproval,  but  di- 
rected attention  rather  to  the  effect  of  the  document  as  a  whole,  in  a 
qualifying  passage  (p.  13 ;  Am.  ed.  p.  14)  which  no  one  of  my  critics  has 
been  at  the  pains  to  notice. 

Nos.  1-3. — The  first  charge  of  unjust  representation  is  this :  ^  I  have 
stated  that  the  Pope  condemns  (p.  25;  Am.  ed.  p.  21)  liberty  of  the 
press  and  liberty  of  speech.  By  reference  to  the  priginal,  it  is  shown 
that  the  right  of  printing  and  speaking  is  not  in  terms  •  condemned 
universally ;  but. only  the  right  of  each  man  to  print  or  speak  all  his 
thoughts  {suos  concejptus  qitoscunque'),  whatever  they  may  be.  Here- 
upon it  is  justly  observed  that  in  all  countries  there  are  laws  against 
blasphemy,  or  obscenity,  or  sedition,  or  all  three.  It  is  argued,  then,  that 
men  are  not  allowed  the  right  to  speak  or  print  all  their  thoughts,  and 
that  such  an  extreme  right  only  is  what  the  Pope  has  condemned. 

It  appears  to  me  that  this  is,  to  use  a  mild  phrase,  mere  trifling  with 
the  subject.  We  are  asked  to  believe  that  what  the  Pope  intended  to 
condemn  was  a  state  of  things  which  never  has  existed  in  any  country 
of  the  world.  Now  he  says  he  is  condemning  one  of  the  commonly 
prevailing  errors  of  the  time,  familiarly  known  to  the  bishops  whom  he 
addresses.^  What  bishop  knows  of  a  State  which  by  law  allows  a  per- 
fectly free  course  to  blasphemy,  filthiness,  and  sedition  ?  The  w^orld 
knows  quite  well  what  is  meant  by  free  speech  and  a  free  press.  It 
does  mean,  generally,  perhaps  it  may  be  said  universally,  the  right  of 
declaring  all  opinions  whatsoever.  The  limit  of  freedom  is  not  the 
justness  of  the  opinion,  but  it  is  this,  that  it  shall  be  opinion  in  good 

^  The  Month,  December,  1874,  p.  494.  Coleridge,  Abomination  of  Desolation,  p.  20.  Bish- 
op Ullathorne,  Pastoral  Letter,  p.  IG.  Monk  of  St.  Augustine's,  p.  15.  Dr.  Newman,  pp.  59, 
72,  in  some  part. 

*  'Probe  noscitis  hoc  tempore  non  paucos  reperiri,  qui,'  etc. — Encycl.,  December  8,  1864. 


THE  RUSTY  TOOLS.  THE  SYLLABUS.  17 

faith,  and  not  mere  grossness,  passion,  or  appeal  to  violence.  The  law 
of  England  at  this  moment,  allowing  all  opinions  whatever,  provided 
they  are  treated  by  way  of  rational  discourse,  most  closely  corresponds 
to  what  the  Pope  has  condemned.  His  condemnation  is  illustrated  by 
his  own  practice  as  Governor  in  the  Roman  States,  where  no  opinion 
could  be  spoken  or  printed  but  such  as  he  approved.  Once,  indeed,  he 
permitted  a  free  discussion  on  Saint  Peter's  presence  and  prelacy  in  the 
city ;  but  he  repented  quickly,  and  forbade  the  repetition  of  it.  We 
might  even  cite  his  practice  as  Pope  in  1S70,  where  every  thing  was 
done  to  keep  the  proceedings  of  the  Council  secret  from  the  Church 
which  it  professed  to  represent,  and  even  practically  secret  from  its 
members,  except  those  who  were  of  the  governing  cabal.  But  there 
can  be  no  better  mode  of  exhibiting  his  real  meaning  than  by  referring 
to  his  account  of  the  Austrian  law.  Hdo  lege  omnis  omnium  opiiiio- 
nurn  et  librarice  artis  libertas,  omnis  turn  fidei^  turn  conscientice  ac 
doctrinoe,  libertas  statuitur}  To  the  kind  of  condemnation  given,  I 
shall  again  refer ;  but  the  matter  of  it  is  nothing  abstract  or  imaginary, 
it  is  actual  freedom  of  thinking,  speaking,  and  printing,  as  it  is  practiced 
in  a  great  civilized  and  Christian  empire.  I  repel,  then,  the  charge 
against  me  as  no  better  than  a  v(?i-bal  subterfuge ;  and  I  again  affirm 
that  in  his  Syllabus,  as  in  his  acts,  the  Pope  has  condemned  liberty  of 
speech  and  liberty  of  the  press. 

No.  5. — I  have  stated  that  the  Pope  condemns  *  those  who  assign  to 
the  State  the  power  of  defining  the  civil  rights  {jura)  and  province  of 
the  Church.'  Hereupon  it  is  boldly  stated  that  '  the  word  civil  is  a 
pure  interpolation.'  ^  This  statement  Dr.  Newman's  undertaking  tempts 
him  to  quote,  but  his  sagacity  and  scholarship  save  him  from  adopting. 
Anticipating  some  cavil  such  as  this,  I  took  care  (which  is  not  noticed) 
to  place  the  word^wr^  in  my  text.  I  now  affirm  that  my  translation 
is  correct.  Jtis  means,  not  right  at  large,  but  a  specific  form  of  right, 
and  in  this  case  civil  right,  to  which  meaning  indeed  the  word  con- 
stantly leans.  It  refers  to  right  which  is  social,  relative,  extrinsic.  Jus 
hominum  situm  est  in  generis  humani  societate  (Cic.  Tusc.  2-26).     If 

*  From  the  Pope's  Allocution  of  June  22,  18G8 :  'By  this  law  is  established  universal  lib- 
erty of  all  opinions  and  of  the  press,  and,  as  of  belief,  so  of  conscience  and  of  teaching.'  Sec 
Vering,  Archiv  fur  Katholisches  Kirchenrecht.     Mainz,  1868,  p.  171,  Band  xx. 

'  The  Abomination  of  Desolation,  p.  21.     Dr.  Newman,  p.  87. 

B 


18  ^^^^^ALiFOnil^^  VATICANISM. 


a  theological  definition  is  desired,  take  that  of  Dens  :  Accipitur  potis- 
simum  jpro  jure  jprout  est  in  altera,  cui  debet  satisfieri  ad  oequalita- 
tem ;  de  jure  sic  surapto  hie  agiiur}  It  is  not  of  the  internal  consti- 
tution of  the  Church  and  the  rights  of  its  members  inter  se  that  the 
proposition  treats,  nor  yet  of  its  ecclesiastical  standing  in  reference 
to  other  bodies ;  but  of  its  rights  in  the  face  of  the  State — that  is  to 
say,  of  its  civil  rights.  My  account  therefore  was  accurate,  and  Mr. 
Coleridge's  criticism  superfluous. 

I  must,  however,  admit  that  Vaticanism  has  a  way  of  escape.  For 
perhaps  it  does  not  admit  that  the  Church  enjoys  any  civil  rights ;  but 
considei-s  as  her  own,  and  therefore  spiritual  in  their  source,  such  rights 
as  we  consider  accidental  and  derivative,  even  where  not  abusive. 

On  this  subject  I  will  refer  to  a  high  authority.  The  Jesuit  Schra- 
der  was,  I  believe,  one  of  those  employed  in  drawing  up  the  Syllabus. 
He  has  published  a  work,  with  a  Papal  Approbation  attached  to  it,  in 
which  he  converts  the  condemnatory  negations  of  the  Syllabus  into  the 
corresponding  afiirmatives.  For  Article  XXX.  he  gives  the  following 
proposition : 

*  The  immunities  of  the  Church,  and  of  ecclesiastical  persons,  have  not  their  origin  in 
civil  right.'  • 

He  adds  the  remark:  *but  are  rooted  in  the  Church's  own  right, 
given  to  her  from  God.'  ^ 

]^o.  7. — I  have  said  those  persons  are  condemned  by  the  Syllabus 
who  hold  that  in  countries  called  Catholic  the  free  exercise  of  other  re- 
ligions may  laudably  be  allowed.  Dr.  Newman  truly  observes^  that  it 
is  the  free  exercise  of  religion  by  immigrants  or  foreigners  which  is 
meant  (horainibus  illuc  im7nigrantibus),  and  that  I  have  omitted  the 
words.  I  omitted  them,  for  my  case  was  strong  enough  without  them. 
But  tliey  seem  to  strengthen  my  case.  For  the  claim  to  a  free  exercise 
of  religion  on  behalf  of  immigrants  or  foreigners  is  a  stronger  one  than 
on  behalf  of  natives,  and  has  been  so  recognized  in  Italy  and  in  Rome 
itself.  I  think  I  am  right  in  saying  that  difference  of  tongue  has  gen- 
erally been  recognized  by  Church  law  as  mitigating  the  objections  to 
the  toleration  of  dissidence.     And  it  is  this  stronger  claim,  not  the 


'  Tractatus  dejure  etjustitid,  No.  6. 

'  Ber  Papst  und  die  Modemen  Ideen.     Von  P.  Clemens  Schrader,  S.  J.     Heft  ii,  p.  65. 

"  Dr.  Newman,  p.  8G. 


THE  RUSTY  TOOLS.  THE  SYLLABUS.  ^9 

weaker. one,  which  is  condemned.     So  that  if  there  be  a  fault,  it  is  the 
fault  of  under,  not  of  over  statement. 

Again  I  support  myself  by  the  high  authority  of  Schrader  the  Jesuit. 
The  following  is  his  Article  LXXYII.  It  draws  no  distinction  of 
countries : 

*  In  our  view  it  is  still  useful  that  the  Catholic  religion  should  be  maintained  as  the  only 
State  religion,  to  the  exclusion  of  eveiy  other. '  ^ 

In  the  appended  remark  he  observes  that  on  this  account  the  Pope, 
in  1856,  condemned  the  then  recent  Spanish  law  which  tolerated  other 
forms  of  worship.2 

1^0.  8. — I  am  charged,  again, ^  with  mistranslating  under  my  eighth 
head.  The  condemnation  in  the  Syllabus  is,  as  I  conceived,  capable  of 
being  construed  to  apply  to  the  entire  proposition  as  it  is  there  given, 
or  to  a  part  of  it  only.  In  brief  it  is  this  :  '  The  Episcopate  has  a  cer- 
tain power  not  inherent,  but  conferred  by  the  State,  which  may  there- 
fore be  withdrawn  at  the  pleasure  of  the  State.'  The  condemnation 
might  be  aimed  at  the  assertion  that  such  a  power  exists,  or  at  the  as- 
sertion that  it  is  withdrawable  at  pleasure.  In  the  latter  sense,  the  con- 
demnation is  unwise  and  questionable  as  a  general  proposition  ;  in  the 
former  sense  it  is  outrageous  beyond  all  bounds ;  and  I  am  boldly  ac- 
cused of  mistranslating*  because  I  chose  the  milder  imputation  of  the 
two,  and  understood  the  censure  to  apply  only  to  withdrawal  ad  libi- 
tum. I  learn  now  that,  in  the  opinion  of  this  antagonist  at  least,  the 
State  was  not  the  source  of  (for  example)  the  power  of  coinage,  which 
was  at  one  time  exercised  by  the  Bishops  of  Durham.  So  that  the  up- 
shot is,  either  my  construction  is  right,  or  my  charge  is  milder  than  it 
should  have  been. 

Nos.  13, 14. — A  grave  charge  is  made  against  me  respecting  the.  mat? 
rimonial  propositions,  because  I  have  ciied  the  Pope  as  condemning 
those  who  affirm  that  the  matrimonial  contract  is  binding  whether 
there  is  or  is  not  (according  to  the  Poman  doctrfne)  a  Sacrament,  and 
have  not  at  the  same  time  stated  that  English,  marriages  are  held  by 
Kome  to  be  sacramental,  and  therefore  valid.^ 

No  charge,  serious  or  slight,  could  be  more  entirely  futile.     But  it  is 

*  Schrader,  p.  80.  ^  Tnf-  ^  Mr.  Coleridge,  Abomination  of  Desolation,  p.  21. 

*  Ibid.  *  Monk  of  St.  Augustine's,  p.  15.    Abomination,  p.  22. 


20  VATICANISM. 

serious,  and  not  slight,  and  those  who  prompt  the  examination  must 
abide  the  recoil.     I  begin  thus  : 

1.  I  am  censured  for  not  having  given  distinctions  between  one 
country  and  another,  which  the  Pope  himself  has  not  given. 

2.  And  which  are  also  thought  unnecessary  by  authorized  expound- 
ers of  the  Syllabus  for  the  faithful.^ 

I  have  before  me  the  Exposition,^  with  the  text,  of  the  Encyclica  and 
Syllabus,  published  at  Cologne  in  1874  with  the  approval  of  authority 
{mit  oberldrcJilicher  Aj^prohation).  In  p.  45  it  is  distinctly  taught  that 
with  marriage  the  State  has  nothing  to  do;  that  it  may  safely  rely 
upon  the  Church ;  that  civil  marriage,  in  the  eyes  of  the  Church,  is 
only  concubinage ;  and  that  the  State,  by  the  use  of  worldly  compul- 
sion, prevents  the  two  concubinary  parties  from  repenting  and  aban- 
doning their  guilty  relation  to  one  another.  Exactly  the  same  is  the 
doctrine  of  the  Pope  himself,  in  his  speeches  published  at  Rome,  where 
civil  marriage  is  declared  to  be,  for  Christians,  nothing  more  than  a 
mere  concubinage,  and  a  filthy  concubinage  {sozzo  concubinato)? 
These  extraordinary  declarations  are  not  due  to  the  fondness  of  the 
Pontiff  for  speaking  impromptu.  In  his  letter  of  September  19, 1852, 
to  King  Victor  Emmanuel,  he  declares  that  matrimony  carrying  the 
Sacrament  is  alone  lawful  for  Christians,  and  that  a  law  of  civil  mar- 
riage, which  goes  to  divide  them,  for  practical  purposes,  constitutes  a 
concubinage  in  the  guise  of  legitimate  marriage.*  So  that,  in  truth,  in 
all  countries  within  the  scope  of  these  denunciations,  the  parties  to  a 
civil  marriage  are  declared  to  be  living  in  an  illicit  connection,  w^hich 
they  are  called  upon  to  renounce.  This  call  is  addressed  to  them  sep- 
arately as  well  as  jointly,  the  wife  being  summoned  to  leave  her  hus- 
band, and  the  husband  to  abandon  his  wife ;  and  after  this  pretended 
repentance  from  a  state  of  sin,  unless  the  law  of  the  land  and  fear  of 
consequences  prevail,  a  new  oennection,  under  the  name  of  a  marriage, 
may  be  formed  with  the  sanction  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  I  know  not 
by  what  infatuation  it  is  that  adversaries  have  compelled  me  thus  to 
develop  a  state  of  facts  created  by  the  highest  authorities  of  the  Roman 

*  Appendix  C. 

^  Die  Encyclica,  der  Syllabus,  und  die  wichtigsten  darin  angefuhrten  Actenstiicke,  nehst 
einer  auafiihrlichen  Einleitung.     Koln,  1874. 

=*  Discorsi  di  Pio  IX.     Roma,  1872, 1873.     Vol.  i.  p.  193  ;  vol.  ii.  p.  356. 

*  Recueil  des  Allocutions  de  Pie  IX.,  etc.     Paris  :  Leclerc,  180.'),  p.  313. 


THE  RUSTY  TOOLS.  THE  SYLLABUS.  gl 

Church,  which  I  shall  now  not  shrink  from  calHng  horrible  and  revolt^ 
ing  in  itself,  dangerous  to  the  morals  of  society,  the  structure  of  the 
family,  and  the  peace  of  life. 

It  is  true,  indeed,  that  the  two  hundred  thousand  non-Roman  marri- 
ages which  are  annually  celebrated  in  England  do  not  at  present  fall 
under  the  foul  epithets  of  Rome.  But  why  ?  Not  because  we  marry, 
as  I  believe  nineteen  twentieths  of  us  marry,  under  the  sanctions  of  re-. 
ligion ;  for  our  marriages  are,  in  the  eye  of  the  Pope,  purely  civil  mar- 
riages; but  only  for  the  technical,  accidental,  and  precarious  reason  that, 
the  disciplinary  'decrees  of  Trent  are  not  canonically  in  force  in  this 
country.  I  apprehend  that  there  is  nothing,  unless  it  be  motives  of 
mere  policy,  to  prevent  the  Pope  from  putting  them  into  force  here 
when  he  pleases.  If,  and  w^hen  that  is  done,  every  marriage  thereafter 
concluded  in  the  English  Church  will,  according  to  his  own  words,  be  a 
filthy  concubinage. 

But  what  claim  of  right  have  we  to  be  treated  better  than  others? 
The  Tridentine  decrees  have  force,  I  understand,  in  Italy,  France,  Ger- 
many, Austria,  Poland,  Hungary;  If  so,  every  civil  marriage  in  those 
countries,  and  every  religious  marriage  not  contracted  before  a  Roman 
Parockus,  as  the  Council  of  Trent  requires,  is  but  the  formation  of  a 
guilty  connection,  which  each  of  the  parties  severally  is  charged  by  the 
Church  of  Rome  to  dissolve,  under  pain  of  being  held  to  be  in  mortal 
sin. 

I  believe  this  statement  can  not  be  impeached.  It  can  only  be  even 
qualified  by  pointing  out  that  Rome  has  reserved  to  herself,  if  and  when 
she  pleases,  the  application  of  the  rule  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  absurd- 
ly called  Clandestinity,  to  non-Roman  marriages  in  Tridentine  coun- 
tries. Benedict  XIY.,  a  great  authority,  questioned  the  propriety  or 
policy  of  the  rule ;  and  Pius  YII.,  in  a  communication  to  the  Primate 
Dalberg,  formerly  Archbishop  of  Mentz,  referred  with  approval  to  the 
language  of  Benedict  XIY.  But  even  they  have  never  taken  that 
course  which  appears  to  be  the  rational  one,  namely,  to  allow  to  non- 
Roman  marriages  generally,  if  contracted  solemnly  and  with  due  pre- 
caution, that  same  consensual  validity  which  all  allow  to  belong  to  mar- 
riages outside  the  Christian  pale.  The  upshot,  then,  of  their  opinions 
seems  to  be  this :  that  while  stigmatizing  marriages  not  Tridentine  as 
concubinages  in  the  manner  we  have  seen,  a  power  is  reserved,  under 


22  VATICANISM. 

the  name  or  plea  6f  special  circumstances,  to  acknowledge  them  or  not 
as  policy  may  i*ecommend.  This  is  but  the  old  story.  All  problems 
which  menace  the  Eoman  Chair  with  difficulties  it  dare  not  face  are  to 
be  solved,  not  by  the  laying  down  of  principles,  good  or  bad,  strict  or 
lax,  in  an  intelligible  manner,  but  by  reserving  all  cases  as  matters  of 
discretion  to  the  breast  of  the  Curia,  which  will  decide  from  time  to 
time,  according  to  its  pleasure,  whether  there  has  been  a  sacrament  or 
not,  and  whetlier  we  are  married  folks,  or  persons  living  in  guilty  com- 
merce, and  rearing  our  children  under  a  false  pretext  of  legitimacy. 

This,  then,  is  the  statement  I  now  make.  It  has  been  drawn  from 
me  by  the  exuberant  zeal  and  precipitate  accusations  of  the  school  of 
Loyola. 

No.  18. — Finally,  it  is  contended  that  I  misrepresent  Rome  in  stat- 
ing that  it  condemns  the  call  to  reconcile  itself  with  progress,  liberal- 
ism, and  modern  civilization.  *" 

It  is  boldly  stated  that  the  Pope  condemns  not  these,  but  only  what 
is  bad  in  these.^  And  thus  it  is  that,  to  avert  public  displeasure,  w^ords 
are  put  in  the  Pope's  mouth  which  he  has  not  used,  and  which  are  at 
variance  with  the  whole  spirit  of  the  document  that  he  has  sent  forth 
to  alarm,  as  Dr.  Newman  too  well  sees,  the  educated  mind  of  Europe.^ 
It  appears  to  be  claimed  for  Popes  that  they  shall  be  supreme  over  the 
^aws  of  language.  But  mankind  protests  against  a  system  which  pal- 
ters in  a  double  sense  with  its  own  solemn  declarations;  imposing 
them  on'  the  weak,  glorying  in  them  before  those  who  are  favorably 
prepossessed,  and  then  contracting  their  sense  ad  libitum,  even  to  the 
point  of  nullity,  by  arbitrary  interpolation,  to  appease  the  scandalized 
understanding  of  Christian  nations.  Without  doubt,  progress,  liberal- 
ism, modern  civilization,  are  terms  more  or  less  ambiguous ;  but  they 
are,  under  a  sound  general  rule,  determinable  by  the  context.  Now 
the  contexts  of  the  Syllabus  and  Encyclica  are  perfectly  unambiguous: 
they  perfectly  explain  what  the  Pope  means  by  the  words.  He  means 
to  condemn  all  that  we  consider  fair  limitation  of  the  claims  of  priest- 
ly power;  to  repudiate  the  title  of  man  to  general  freedom  of  thought, 
and  of  speech  in  all  its  varied  forms  of  utterance ;  the  title  of  a  nation 
to  resist  those  who  treat  the  sovereignty  over  it  as  a  property,  and  who 

*  Month,  as  sup.  p.  496.     Bishop  UUathorne,  Expostulation  Unraveled,  p.  69. 
"  Dr.  Newman,  p.  90. 


THE  RUSTY  TOOLS.  THE  SYLLABUS.  23 

would  enforce  on  the  people — for  example,  of  the  Papal  States — a  gov- 
ernment independently  of  or  against  its  will ;  in  a  word,  the  true  and 
only  sure  titles  of  freedom  in  all  its  branches,  inward  and  outward, 
mental,  moral,  and  political,  as  they  are  ordinarily  understood  in  the 
judgment  of  this  age  and  country. 

I  have  gone,  I  believe,  through  every  particular  impeachment  of  my 
account  of  the  language  of  the  Syllabus  and  the  Encyclica.  If  each 
and  all  of  these  have  failed,  I  presume  that  I  need  not  dwell  upon  the 
general  allegations  of  opponents  in  respect  to  those  heads  where  they 
have  not  been  pleased  to  enter  upon  details.^ 

Now  it  is  quite  idle  to  escape  the  force  of  these  charges  by  re- 
proaches aimed  at  my  unacquaintance  with  theology,  and  by  recom- 
mendations, sarcastic  or  sincere,  that  I  should  obtain  some  instruction 
in  its  elements.  To  such  reproaches  I  shall  peacefully  and  respect- 
fully bow,  so  soon'as  I  shall  have  been  convicted  of  error.  But  I  think 
I  have  shown  that  the  only  variations  from  exact  truth  to  which  I  can 
plead  guilty  are  variations  in  the  way  of  understatements  of  the  case 
which  it  was  my  duty  to  produce. 

2.  The  Authority  of  the  Syllabus. 

I  have  next  to  inquire  what  is  the  authority  of  the  Syllabus  ? 

Had  I  been  inclined  to  push  my  case  to  extremes,  I  might  very 
well  have  contended  that  this  document  was  delivered  ex  cathedra. 
Schulte,  whose  authority  as  a  Canonist  is  allowed  on  all  hands  to  be 
great,  founds  his  argument  on  that  opinion.'-^  Dr.  Ward,  who  has  been 
thanked^  by  His  Holiness  for  his  defense  of  the  faith,  wonders  that 
any  one  can  doubt  it.*  The  Pope  himself,  in  his  speeches,  couples  the 
Syllabus  with  the  Decrees  of  the  Vatican  Council,  as  being  jointly  the 
great  fundamental  teachings  of  these  latter  days;  and  he  even  de- 
scribes it  as  the  only  anchor  of  safety  for  the  coming  time.^  Bishop 
Fessler,  whose  work  was  published  some  time  after  the  Council,  to  tone 
down  alarms,  and  has  had  a  formal  approval  from  the  Pope,^  holds 

'  The  Month,  as  sup.  p.  497. 

2  Power  of  the  Roman  Popes  (transl.  by  Sommers.  Adelaide,  1871). 

3  Dublin  Review,  July,  1870,  p.  224. 

*  Ibid.,  July,  1874,  p' 9. 

*  Discorsi  di  Pio  IX.,  vol.  i.  p.  59. 

*  Fessler,  True  and  False  Infallibility  (English  transl),  p.  iiL 


24  VATICANISM. 

that  the  Syllabus  is  not  a  document  proceeding  ex  cathedra.  But  it 
touches  faith  and  morals :  its  condemnations  are,  an*d  are  allowed  to  be, 
assertions  of  their  contradictories,  into  which  assertions  they  have  been 
formally  converted  by  Schrader,  a  writer  of  authority,  who  was  official- 
ly employed  in  its  compilation.  Furthermore,  though  I  was  wrong  (as 
Dr.  IS'ewman  has  properly  observed^)  in  assuming  that  the  Encyclica 
directly  covered  all  the  propositions  of  the  Syllabus,  yet  this  document 
is  addressed  by  the  Pope  through  Cardinal  Antonelli  to  all  the  Bishops 
of  the  Christian  (Papal)  world — therefore  in  his  capacity  as  universal 
Teacher. 

The  reasons  advanced  by  Bishop  Fessler  in  the  opposite  sense  appear 
to  be  very  weak.  When  the  Pope  (by  conversion  of  the  23d  Proposi- 
tion) declares  that  preceding  pontiffs  have  not  exceeded  the  limits  of 
their  power,  and  h»'e  not  usurped  the  rights  of  princes.  Bishop  Fessler 
replies  that  we  are  here  dealing  only  wnth  facts  of  Iiistory,  not  touch- 
ing faith  or  morals,  so  that  there  is  no  subject-matter  for  a  dogmatic 
definition.^  But  the  depositions  of  sovereigns  were  wont  to  be  founded 
on  considerations  of  faith  or  morals;  as  when  Gregory  YII.,  in  A.D. 
1079,  charged  upon  Henry  lY.  many  capital  crimes,^  and  as  when  In- 
nocent III.  deposed  Kaymond  of  Toulouse  for  (among  other  reasons) 
not  proceeding  satisfactorily  with  the  extirpation  of  the  Albigenses.* 
The  Christian  creed  itself  is  chiefly  composed  of  matters  of  fact  set 
forth  as  articles  of  belief.  And  he  who  asserts  that  the  acts  of  Popes 
did  not  go  beyond  their  rights,  distinctly  expresses  his  belief  in  the 
claims  of  right  which  those  acts  involved. 

Fessler's  other  objection  is  that  the  form  of  the  Syllabus  does  not  set 
forth  the  intention  of  the  Pope.^  But  he  appears  to  have  overlooked 
the  perfectly  explicit  covering  letter  of  Antonelli,  which  in  the  Pope's 
name  transmits  the  Syllabus,  in  order  that  the  w^hole  body  of  Latin 
Bishops  might  have  before  their  eyes  those  errors  and  false  doctrines 
of  the  age  which  the  Pope. had  proscribed.  Nor  does  Fessler  venture 
to  assert  that  the  Syllabus  is  w^ithout  dogmatic  authority.  He  only 
says  many  theologians  have  doubts  upon  the  question  whether  it  be 
I   t ■ . ■ — — 

^  Newman,  p.  82. 

^  Fessler,  Vraie  etfaiisse  InfailUhilit^  des  Popes  (French  transl.),  p.  89. 
^  Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  iv.  420. 
*  Ibid.,  V.  549.  *  Fessler,  p.  132. 


THE  RUSTY  TOOLS.     THE  SYLLABUS.  25 

ex  cathedrosu:  theological  science  will  hereafter  have  to  examine  and 
decide  the  matter :'  in  the  mean  time  every  Eoman  Catholic  is  bound 
to  submit  to  and  obey  it.  Such  is  the  low  or  moderate  doctrine  con- 
cerning the  Syllabus.^  Thus  its  dogmatic  authority  is  probable:  its 
title  to  universal  obedience  is  absolute,  while  among  its  assertions  is 
that  the  Church  has  the  right  to  employ  force,  and.  that  the  Popes 
have  not  exceeded  their  powers  or  invaded  the  rights  of  princes. 

Now,  when  I  turn  to  the  seductive  pages  of  Dr.  Newman,  I  find 
myself  to  be  breathing,  another  air,  and  discussing,  it  would  seem,  some 
other  Syllabus.  If  the  Pope  were  the  author  of  it,  he  would  accept 
it.^  But  he  is  not,*  and  no  one  knows  who  is.  Therefore  it  has  no 
dogmatic  force.^  It  is  an  index  to  a  set  of  dogmatic  Bulls  and  Allo- 
cutions, but  it  is  no  more  dogmatic  itself  than  any  other  index  or 
table  of  contents.^  Its  value  lies  in  its  references,  and  from  them 
alone  can  w^e  learn  its  meaning. 

If  we  had  Dr.  Newman  for  Pope,  we  should  be  tolerably  safe,  so 
merciful  and  genial  would  be  his  rule.  But  when  Dr.  Newman,  not 
being  Pope,  contradicts  and  nullifies  what  the  Pope  declares,  whatever 
we  may  wish,  we  can  not  renounce  the  use  of  our  eyes.  Fessler,  who. 
writes,  as  Dr.  Newman  truly  says,  to  curb  exaggerations,''  and  who  is 
approved  by  the  Pope,  declares^  that  every  subject  of  the  Pope,  and 
thus  that  Dr.  Newman,  is  bound  to  obey  the  Syllabus,  because  it  is 
from  the  Pope  and  of  the  Pope.  '  Before  the  Council  of  the  Vatican, 
every  Catholic  was  bound  to  submit  to  and  obey  the  Syllabus;  the 
Council  of  the  Vatican  has  made  no  difference  in  that  obhgation  of 
conscience.'  He  questions  its  title,  indeed,  to  be  held  as  ex  cathedrd, 
and  this  is  his  main  contention  against  Von  Schulte ;  but  he  nowhere 
denies  its  infallibility,  and  he  distinctly  includes  it  in  the  range  of 
Christian  obedience. 

Next,  Dr.  Newman  lays  it  down  that  the  words  of  the  Syllabus  are 
of  no  force  in  themselves,  except  as  far  as  they  correspond  with  the 
terms  of  the  briefs  to  which  references  are  given,  and  which  he  ad- 
mits to  be  binding.     But  here  Dr.  Newman  is  in  flat  contradiction  to 


'  Fessler,  pp.  8,  132,  134.  Mbid.,  p.  81. 

=^  Ibid.,  p.  8.  «Ibid.,  p.  8. 

3  Newman,  p.  20.  '  Ibid.,  p.  81. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  79.  «  Fessler,  p.  8  (French  transl.). 


26  VATICANISM. 

tlie  oflScial  letter  of  Cardinal  Antonelli,  who  states  that  tjie  Syllabus 
has  been  framed,  and  is  sent  to  the  Bishops,  by  command  of  the  Pope, 
inasmuch  as  it  is  likely  that  they  have  by  no  means  all  seen  the  prior 
instruments,  and  in  order  that  they  may  know  from  the  Syllabus  itself 
what  it  is  that  has  been  condemned.  Thus  then  it  will  be  seen  that 
the  Syllabus  has  been  authoritatively  substituted  for  the  original  doc- 
uments as  a  guide  to  the  Bishops.  And  if,  as  Dr.  Newman  says,  and 
as  I  think  in  some  cases  is  the  fact,  the  propositions  of  the  Syllabus 
widen  the  propositions  of  those  documents,  it  is  the  wider  and  not  the 
narrower  form  that  binds,  unless  Dr.  Newman  is  more  in  the  confi- 
dence of  Rome  than  tlie  Secretary  of  the  Vatican  Council,  and  than 
the  regular  minister  of  the  Pope. 

Again,  I  am  reminded  by  the  Dublin  Beview,  a  favored  organ  of 
Roman  opinions,  that  utterances  ex  cathedra '  are  not  the  only  form  in 
which  Infallibility  can  speak ;  and  that  the  Syllabus,  whether  ex  ca- 
thedra or  not,  since  it  has  been  uttered  by  the  Pope,  and  accepted  by 
the  Church  diffused,  that  is  to  say,  by  the  Bishops  diffused,  is  undoubt- 
edly infallible.  This  w^ould  seem  to  be  the  opinion  of  Bishop  Ulla- 
thorne."  But  what  is  conclusive  as  to  practical  effect  upon  the  whole 
cilse  is  this — that  while  not  one  among  the  Roman  apologists  admits 
that  the  Syllabus  is  or  may  be  erroneous,  the  obligation  to  obey  it  is 
asserted  on  all  hands,  and  is  founded  on  the  language  of  an  infal- 
lible Vatican  Decree.  I  have  been  content  to  argue  the  case  of  the 
Syllabus  upon  the  supposition  that,  in  relation  to  England  at  least, 
its  declarations  were  purely  abstract.  The  readers,  however,  of  Mac- 
millan^s  Magazine  for  February  may  perceive  that  even  now  we  are 
not  without  a  sample  of  its  fruits  in  a  matrimonial  case,  of  which  par- 
ticulars were  long  ago  given  in  the  Times  newspaper,  and  which  may 
possibly  again  become  the  object  of  public  notice. 

It  is  therefore  absolutely  superfluous  to  follow  Dr.  Newman  through 
his  references  to  the  Briefs  and  Allocutions  marginally  noted.  The  Syl- 
labus is  part  of  that  series  of  acts  to  which  the  dogmatizations  of  1854 
and,  1870  also  belong;  and  it  bridges  over  the  interval  between  them. 
It  generalizes,  and  advisedjy  enlarges,  a  number  of  particular  con- 
demnations ;  and,  addressing  them  to  all  the  Bishops,  brings  the  whole 

*  Dublin  Review,  Jan.  1875,  pp.  177,  210. 

"  Bishop  Ullathorne,  Expost.  Unraveled,  p.  6G. 


THE  RUSTY  TOOLS.     THE  SYLLABUS.  27 

* 

of  the  Latin  obedience  within  its  net.     The  fish,  when  it  is  inclosed 
and  beached,  may  struggle  for  a  while ;  but  it  dies,  while  the  fisher- 
man lives,  carries  it  to  market,  and  quietly  puts  the  price  into  his  till. 
The  result  then  is : 

1.  I  abide  by  my  account  of  the  contents  of  the  Syllabus. 

2.  I  have  understated,  not  overstated,  its  authority. 

3.  It  may  be  ex  cathedra  /  it  seems  to  have  the  infallibility  of  dog- 
ma :  it  unquestionably  demands,  and  is  entitled  (in  the  code  of  Vati- 
canism) to  demand,  obedience. 


III.  The  Vatican  Council  and  the  Infallibility  of  the  PorE. 
Breach  mith  History^  No,  1. 

Like  the  chieftains  of  the  heroic  time.  Archbishop  Manning  takes 
his  place  with  promptitude,  and  operates  in  front  of  the  force  he  leads. 

Upon  the  first  appearance  of  my  tract,  he  instantly  gave  utterance 
to  the  following  propositions;  nor* has  he  since  receded  from  them : 

1.  That  the  Infallibility  of  the  Pope  was  a  doctrine  of  Divine  Faith 
before  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  was  held. 

2.  That  the  Vatican  Decrees  have  in  Ho  jot  or  tittle  changed  either 
the  obligations  or  the  conditions  of  civil  allegiance. 

3.  That  the  civil  allegiance  of  Koman  Catholics  is  as  undivided  as 
that  of  other  Christians,  and  neither  more  noV  less  limited. 

4.  That  the  claim  of  the  Poman  Church  against  obedience  to  the 
civil  power  in  certain  cases  is  the  same  as  that  made  by  other  religions 
communions  in.  England. 

These  four  propositions  may  be  treated  as  two.  The  first  is  so  allied 
with  the  second,  and  the  third  with  the  fourth,  that  the  two  members 
of  each  pair  respectively  must  stand  or  fall  together.  I  can  make  no 
objection  to  the  manner  in  which  they  raise  the  question.  I  shall  leave 
it  to  others,  whom  it  may  more  concern,  to  treat*  that  portion*  of  his 
work  in  which,  passing  by  matters  that 'more  nearly  touched  his  argu- 
ment, he  has  entered  at  large  on  the  controversy  between  Rome  and 
the  German  Empire ;  nor  shall  I  now  discuss  his  compendium  of 
Italian  history,  which  in  no  manner  touches  the  question  whether  the 
dominion  of  the  Pope  ought  again  to  be  imposed  by  foreign  arms  upon 


28  VATICANISM. 

a  portion  of  the  Italian  people.  But  of  the  four  propositions  I  will 
say  that  I  accept  them  all,  subject  to  the  very  simple  condition  that 
the  word  ^not'  be  inserted  in  the  three  which  are  affirmative,  and  its 
equivalent  struck  out  from  the  one  which  is  negative. 

Or,  to  state  the  case  in  my  own  words : 

My  task  will  be  to  make  good  the  two  following  assertions,  which 
were  the  principal  subjects  of  my  former  argument : 

1.  That  upon  the  authority,  for  many  generations,  of  those  who  pre- 
ceded Archbishop  Manning  and  his  coadjutors  in  their  present  official 
position,  as  well  as  upon  other  authority,  Papal  Infallibility  was  not 
•a  doctrine  of  Divine  Faith  before  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  was 
held.' 

And  that,  therefore,  the  Vatican  Decrees  have  changed  the  obliga- 
tions and  conditions  of  civil  allegiance. 

2.  That  the  claim  of  the  Papal  Church  against  obedience  to  the  civil 
power  in  certain  cases  not  only  goes  beyond,  but  is  essentially  different 
from  that  made  by  other  religious  communions  or  ^y  their  members 
in  England. 

And  that,  therefore,  the  civil  allegiance  of  those  who  admit  the 
claim,  and  carry  it  to  its  logical  consequences,  is  not  for  the  purposes 
of  the  State  the  same  with  that  of  other  Christians,  but  is  differently 
limited. 

In  his  able  and  lengthened  work.  Archbishop  Manning  has  found 
space  for  a  dissertation  on  the  great  German  quarrel,  but  has  not  in- 
cluded, in  his  proof  of  the  belief  in  Papal  Infallibility  before  1870,  any 
reference  to  the  history  of  the  Church  over  which  he  presides,  or  the 
sister  Church  in  Ireland.  This  very  grave  deficiency  I- shall  endeavor 
to  make  good,  by  enlarging  and  completing  the  statement  briefly  given 
in  my  tract.  That  statement  was  that  the  English  and  Irish  penal  laws 
against  lioman  Catholics  were  repealed  on  the  faith  of  assurances 
which  have  not  been  fulfilled.  , 

IIad*all  antagonists  been  content  to  reply  with  the  simple  ingenuous- 
ness of  Dr.  Newman,  it  migh£  have  been  unnecessary  to  resume  this 
portion  of  the  subject.  I  make  no  complaint  of  the  Archbishop;  for 
such  a  reply  would  have  destroyed  his  case.  Dr.  Newman,  struggling 
hard  with  the  difficulties  of  his  task,  finds  that  the  statement  of  Dr. 
Doyle  requires  (p.  12)  'some  pious  interpretation;'  that  in  1826  the 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL  AND  INFALLIBILITY.  29 

clergy  both  of  England  and  Ireland  were  trained  in  Gallican  opinions 
(p.  13),  and  had  modes  of  thinking  'foreign  altogether  to  the  minds  of 
the  entourage  of  the  Holy  See ;'  that  the  British  ministers  onght  to 
have  applied  to  Rome  (p.  14)  to  learn  the  civil  duties  of  British  sub- 
jects ;  and  that '  no  pledge  from  Catholics  was  of  any  value  to  which 
Eome  was  not  a  party.' 

This  declaration  involves  all,  and  more  than  all,  that  I  had  ventured 
reluctantly  to  impute.  Statesmen  of  the  future,  recollect  the  words, 
and  recollect  from  whom  they  came :  from  the  man  who  by  his  genius, 
piety,  and  learning  towers  above  all  the  eminences  of  the  Anglo-Papal 
communion ;  who,  so  declares  a  Romish  organ,^  *  has  been  the  mind 
and  tongue  to  shape  and  express  the  English  Catholic  position  in  the 
many  controversies  which  have  arisen'  since  1845,  and  who  has  been 
roused  from  his  repose  on  this  occasion  only  by  the  most  fervid  ap- 
peals to  him  as  the  man  that  could  best  teach  his  co-religionists  how 
and  what  to  think.  The  lesson  received  is  this.  Although  pledges 
were  given,  although  their  validity  was  firmly  and  even  passionately^ 
asserted,  although  the  subject-matter  was  one  of  civil  allegiance, '  no 
pledge  from  Catholics  was  of  any  value  to  which  Rome  was  not  a 
party' (p.  14). 

In  all  seriousness  I  ask  whether  there  is  not  involved  in  these  words 
of  Dr.  Newman  an  ominous  approximation  to  my  allegation  that  the 
seceder  to  the  Roman  Church  'places  his  loyalty  and  civil  duty  at  the 
mercy  of  another  V 

But  as  Archbishop  Manning  has  asserted  that  the  Decrees  of  the 
Vatican  have  'in  no  jot  or  tittle'  altered  civil  allegiance,^  and  that 
'  before  the  Council  was  held  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope  was  a  doc- 
trine of  Divine  Faith,'*  and  as  he  is  the  ofiicial  head  of  the  Anglo- 
Roman  body,  I  must  test  his  assertions  by  one  of  those  appeals  to  his- 
tory which  he  has  sometimes  said  are  treason  to  the  Church;^  as  in- 
deed they  are  in  liis  sense  of  the  Church,  and  in  his  sense  of  treason. 
It  is  only  justice  to  the  Archbishop  to  add  tliat  he  does  not  stand 


^  The  Month,  December,  1874,  p.  4G1. 

^  Bishop  Doyle,  Esmy  on  the  Claims,  p.  38. 

^  Letter  to  the  London  Times,  November  7,  1874. 

*  Letter  to  the  New  York  Herald,  November  10,  1874.     Letter  to  MacmillarCs  Magazine, 
October  22. 
•    ^  Temporal  Mission  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 


30  VATICANISM. 

alone.  Bishop  Ullatliorae  says, '  The  Pope  always  wielded  this  infalli- 
bility, and  all  men  knew  this  to  be  the  fact.'  ^  We  shall  presently  find 
some  men,  whose  history  the  Bishop  should  have  been  familiar  with, 
who  did  not  know  this  to  be  the  fact,  but  very  solemnly  assured  us 
they  knew  the  exact  contrary. 

This  is  not  an  affair,  as  Dr.  Newman  seems  to  think,  of  a  particular 
generation  of  clergy  who  had  been  educated  in  Galilean  opinions.  In 
all  times,  from  the  reign  of  Elizabeth  to  that  of  Victoria,  the  lay  Ro- 
man Catholics  of  England,  as  a  body,  have  been  eminently  and  unre- 
servedly loyal.  But  they  have  been  as  eminently  noted  for  their  thor- 
ough estrangement  from  Ultramontane  opinions;  and  their  clergy, 
down  to  the  period  of  the  Emancipation  Act,  felt  with  them ;  though 
a  school  addicted  to  curialism  and  Jesuitism,  thrust  among  them  by 
the  Popes  at  the  commencement  of  the  period,  first  brought  upon  them 
grievous  sufferings,  then  succeeded  in  attaching  a  stigma  to  their  name, 
and  now  threatens  gradually  to  accomplish  a  transformation  of  their 
opinions,  with  an  eventual  change  in  their  spirit,  of  which  it  is  difficult 
to  foresee  the  bounds.  ]S"ot  that  the  men  who  now  hold  the  ancestral 
view  w^ill,  as  a  rule,  exchange  it  for  the  view  of  the  Vatican ;  but  tliat, 
as  in  the  course  of  nature  they  depart,  Yaticanists  will  grow  up  and 
take  their  places. 

The  fii'st  official  head  of  the  Anglo-Roman  body  in  England  was  the 
wise  and  loyal  Archpriest  Blackwell.  He  was  deposed  by  the  Pope 
in  1608, '  chiefly,  it  is  supposed,  for  his  advocacy  of  the  Oath  of  Alle- 
giance,'^ which  had  been  devised  by  King  James,  in  order  that  he  might 
confer  peace  and  security  upon  loyal  Roman  Catholics.^  Bellarmin 
denounced,  as  heretical,  its  denial  of  the  power  of  the  Pope  to  depose 
the  King  and  release  his  subjects  from  their  allegiance.  Pope  Paul 
Y.  condemned  the  oath  by  a  brief  in  October,  1606.  The  unfortunate 
members  of  his  communion  could  not  believe  this  brief  to  be  authentic* 
So  a  second  bi-ief  was  sent  in  September,  1607,  to  confirm  and  enforce 
the  first.  Blackwell  gallantly  advised  his  flock  to  take  the  oath  in  de- 
fiance of  the  brief.  Priests  confined  in  Newgate  petitioned  the  Pope 
to  have  compassion  on  them.     Forty-eight  doctors  of  the  Sorbonne 

'  Bishop  Ullathorne,  Letter,  p.  14. 
*  Butler,  Historical  Memoirs,  vol.  iii.  p.  411. 
^  Ibid.,  vol.  i.  pp.  303  sqq. 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL ;AND  INFALLIBILITY.  ,  81 

against  six,  declared  that  it  might  be  taken  witli  good  conscience. 
And  taken  it  was  by  many ;  but  taken  in  despite  of  the  tyrannical  in- 
junctions of  Paury.j  unhappily  confirmed  by  Urban  VIII.  and  by  In- 
nocent X.^ 

When  it  was  proposed,  in  1648,  to  banish  Eoman  Catholics  on  ac- 
count of  the  deposing  power,  their  divines  met  and  renounced  the  doc- 
trine. This  renunciation  was  condemned  at  Rome  as  heretical ;  but 
the  attitude  of  France  on  these  questions  at  the  time  prevented  the 
publication  of  the  decree.^ 

When  the  loyal  remonstrance  of  1661  had  been  signed  by  certain 
Bishops  and  others  of  Ireland,  it  was  condemned  at  Rome,  in  July, 
1662,  by  the  Congregation  de  propaganda  ;  and  in  the  same  month 
the  Papal  Kuncio  at  Brussels,  who  superintended  the  concerns  of  Irish 
Roman  Catholics  at  the  time,  denounced  it  as  already  condemned  by 
the  constitutions  of  Paul  V.  and  Innocent  X. ;  and  specially  censured 
the  ecclesiastics  who,  by  signing  it,  had  misled  the  laity.^ 

Well  may  Butler  say, '  The  claim  of  the  Popes  to  temporal  power^ 
by  divine  right,  has  been  one  of  the  most  calamitous  events  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  Church.  •Its  effects  since  the  Reformation,  on  the  English 
and  Irish  Catholics,  have  been  dreadful.'  *  And  again ':  '  How  often 
did  our  ancestors  experience  thatf  ultra-catholicism  is  one  of  the  worst 
enemies  of  cfitholicity !'  ^ 

The  vigor  of  the  mind  of  Dryden  is  nowhere  more  evident  than 
in  parts  of  his  poems  of  controversial  theology;  and  they  are  im- 
portant, as  exhibiting  that  view  of  Roman  Catholic  tenets  which  was 
presented  at  the  time  for  the  purposes  of  proselytism.  He  mentions 
various  opinions  as  to  the  seat  of  infallibility,  describing  that  of  the 
Pope's  infallibility,  with  others,  as  held  by  ^  some  doctors,'  and  states 
what  he  considers  to  be  the  true  doctrine  of  the  Latin  Church,  as  follows  : 

'  I  then  affirm,  that  this  unfailing  guide 
In  Pope  and  general  councils  must  reside, 
Both  lawful,  both  combined ;  what  one  decrees, 
By  numerous  votes,  the  other  ratifies : 
On  this  undoubted  sense  the  Church  relies.'^ 


^  Butler,  vol  i.  p.  352. 

'  Caron,  Remonstrantia  Hibernorum.     Ed.  1731,  p.  7.     Comp.  Butler,  Hist.  Memoirs^  vol. 
ii.  p.  18. 

'  Caron,  p.  4.     Butler,  vol.  ii.  p.  401-2.  '  Ibid.,  vol.  ii.  p.  8."; ;  also  vol.  ii.  p.  20. 

*  Butler,  vol.  i.  p.  182.  e  The  Hind  and  Panther,  part  ii. 


32  VATIflANISM. 

When,  in  1682,  the  Gallican  Church,  by  the  first  of  its  four  Arti- 
cles, rejected  the  sophistical  distinction  of  direct  and  indirect  author- 
ity, and  absolutely  denied  the  power  of  the  Pope  in  temporals,  to  this 
article,  says  Butler,  there  was  hardly  a  dissentient  voice  either  clerical 
or  lay.  He  adds  that  this  principle  is  '  now  adopted  by  the  universal 
Catholic  Church.' » 

Such  was  the  sad  condition  of  the  Anglo-Eoman  body  in  the  seven- 
teenth century.  They  were  ground  between  the  demands  of  the  civil 
power,  stern,  but  substantially  just,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  cruel  and 
outrageous  impositions  of  the  Court  of  Eome  on  the  other.  Even  for 
the  shameful  scenes  associated  with  the  name  and  time  of  Titus  Gates 
that  Court  is  largely  responsible:  and  the  spirit  that  governed  it  in 
regard  to  the  Oath  of  Allegiance  is  the  very  same  spirit  wliich  gained 
its  latest  triumphs  in  the  Council  of  the  Vatican. 

I  now  pass  to  the  period  which  followed  the  Ee volution  of  1688, 
especially  with  reference  to  the  bold  assertion  that  before  1870  the 
Pope's  infallibility  was  a  doctrine  of  Divine  Faith. 

The  Ee  volution,  brought  about  by  invasions  of  the  law  and  the  con- 
stitution, w^ith  which  the  Church  of  Eome  w^as  disastrously  associated, 
necessarily  partook  of  a  somewhat  vindictive  character  as  towards  the 
Anglo-Eoman  body.  Our  penal  provisions  were  a  mitigated,  but  also 
a  debased  copy  of  the  Papal  enactments  against  heresy.  It  w^as  not 
until  1757,  on  the  appointment  of  the  Duke  of  Bedford  to  the  Lord- 
Lieutenancy  of  Ireland,  that  the  first  sign  of  life  was  given.^  Indeed, 
it  was  only  in  1756  that  a  new  penal  law  had  been  proposed  in  Ire- 
land.^ But  in  the  next  year  the  Irish  Eoman  Catholic  Committee 
published  a  Declaration  which  disavowed  the  deposing  and  absolving 
power,  with  other  odious  opinions.  Here  it  w^as  averred  that  the  Pope 
had  ^no  temporal  or  civil  jurisdiction,'  Mirectly  or  indirectly,  within 
this  realm,'  And  it  was  also  averred  that  it  ^  is  not  an  article  of  the 
Catholic  faith,  neither  are  we  thereby  obliged  to  believe  or  profess  that 
the  Pope  is  infallible :'  in  diametrical  contradiction  to  the  declaration 
of  Archbishop  Manning  that  persons  of  his  religion  w^ere  bound  to 
this  belief  before  the  Council  of  1870.* 

'  Butler,  vol.  i.  p.  358,  and  vol.  ii.  p.  20. 

'  Butler,  vol.  iv.  p.  511 .     Sir  II.  ParnelV,  History  of  the  Penal  Laws. 

'  Madden,  Historical  Notice  of  the  Penal  Laws,  p.  8. 

*  I  cite  the  terms  of  this  document  from  The  Elector's  Guide,  addressed  to  the  freeholders 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL  AND  INFALLIBILITY.  33 

It  may,  indeed,  be  observed  that  in  declaring  they  are  not  required 
to  believe  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope,  the  subscribers  to  this  document 
do  not  say  any  thing  to  show  that  they  did  not  for  themselves  hold  the 
tenet.  But  a  brief  explanation  will  show  that  the  distinction  in  this 
case  is  little  better  than  futile.  As  we  have  seen,  the  Declaration  set 
forth  that  the  Pope  had  no  temporal  power  in  England.  Now  in  the 
notorious  Bull  Unam  Sanctam  it  had  been  positively  declared  ex  ca- 
thedra that  both  the  temporal  and  the  spiritual  sword  were  at  the 
command  of  the  Church,  and  that  it  was  the  office  of  the  Pope,  by  a 
power  not  human,  but  divinp,  to  judge  and  correct  the  secular  author- 
ity. The  language  of  the  Declaration  of  1757  was  directly  at  variance 
with  the  language  of  the  Pope,  speaking  ex  cathedra,  and  therefore 
here,  if  any  where,  infallible.  It  could,  therefore,  only  have  been  con- 
sistently used  by  persons  who  for  themselves  did  not  accept  the  tenet. 
I  am  aware  it  will  be  argued  that  the  infallible  part  of  the  Bull  is  only 
the  last  sentence.  It  is  well  for  those  who  so  teach  that  Boniface  YIII. 
is  not  alive  to  hear  them.  The  last  sentence  is  introduced  by  the  word 
*  Porro,'  furthermore  :  a  strange  substitute  for  '  Be  it  enacted.'  The 
true  force  of  that  sentence  seems  to  be :  '  Furthermore,  we  declare  that 
this  subjection  to  the  Koman  Pontiff,  as  hereinbefore  described,  is  to 
be  held  as  necessary  for  salvation.'  It  is  not  the  substance,  but  an  ad- 
dition to  the  substance. 

If,  however,  any  thing  had  been  wanting  in  this  Declaration,  it  would 
have  been  abundantly  supplied  by  the  Protestation  of  the  Koman  Cath- 
olics of  England  in  1788-9.  In  this  very  important  document,  which 
brought  about  the  passing  of  the  great  English  Belief  Act  of  1791, 
besides  a  repetition  of  the  assurances  generally  which  had  been  there- 
tofore conveyed,  there  are  contained  statements  of  the  greatest  sig- 
nificance. 

1.  That  the  subscribers  to  it  '  acknowledge  no  infallibility  in  the 
Pope.; 

2.  That  their  Church  has  no  power  that  can  directly  or  indirectly 
injure  Protestants,  as  all  she  can  do  is  to  refuse  them  her  sacraments, 
which  they  do  not  want.  '' 

3.  That  no  ecclesiastical  power  whatever  can  ^  directly  or  indirectly 

of  the  County  of  York.    No.  1,  p.  44.    York,  1826.     It  is  also,  I  believe,  to  be  found  in  Par- 
nell's  History  of  the  Penal  Laws.     1 808. 

0 


34  VATICANISM. 

affect  or  interfere  with  the  independence,  sovereignty,  laws,  constitu- 
tion, or  government '  of  the  realm. 

This  Protestation  was,  in  the  strictest  sense,  a  representative  and 
binding  document.  It  was  signed  by  two  hundred  and  forty-one 
priests,^  including  all  the  Yicars  Apostolic :  by  all  the  clergy  and  laity 
in  England  of  any  note ;  and  in  1789,  at  a  general  meeting  of  the 
English  Catholics  in  London,  it  was  subscribed  by  every  person  present.^ 

Thus  we  have  on  the  part  of  the  entire  body  of  which  Archbishop 
Manning  is  now  the  head^  a  direct,  literal,  and  unconditional  rejection 
of  the  cardinal  tenet  which  he  tells  us  Jias  always  been  believed  by 
his  Church,  and  was  an  article  of  Divine  Faith  before  as  well  as  after 
1870.  Nor  was  it  merely  that  the  Protestation  and  the  Relief  coin- 
cided in  time.  The  protesters  explicitly  set  forth  that  the  penal  laws 
against  them  were  founded  on  the  doctrines  imputed  to  them,  and  they 
asked  and  obtained  the  relief  on  the  express  ground  that  they  re- 
nounced and  condemned  the  doctrines.* 

Some  objection  seems  to  have  been  taken  at-  Pome  to  a  portion  (we 
are  not  told  what)  of  the  terms  of  the  Protestation.  The  history  con- 
nected herewith  is  rather  obscurely  given  in  Butler.  But  the  Protes- 
tation itself  was,  while  the  Bill  was  before  Parliament,  deposited  in  the 
British  Museum,  by  order  of  the  Anglo-Roman  body :  '  that  it  may  be 
preserved  there  as  a  lasting  memorial  of  their  political  and  moral  in- 
tegrity.'^ Two  of  the  four  Vicars  Apostolic,  two  clergymen,  and  one 
layman  withdrew  their  names  from  the  Protestation  on  the  deposit ; 
all  the  rest  of  the  signatures  remained. 

Canon  Flanagan's  History  of  the  Church  in  England  impugns  the 
representative  character  of  the  Committee,  and  declares  that  the  Court 
of  Rome  approved  of  proceedings  taken  in  opposition  to  it.^     But  the 

*  Slater's  Letters  on  Roman  Catholic  Tenets^  p.  6. 
'  Butler,  Hist.  Memoirs,  vol.  ii.  pp.  118, 126. 

^  Prelates  really  should  remember  that  they  may  lead  their  trustful  lay  folloAjers  into 
strange  predicaments.  Thus  Mr.  Towneley  (of  Towneley,  I  believe),  in  his  letter  of  Nov.  18  to 
the  London  Times,  dwells,  I  have  no  doubt  with  perfect  justice,  on  the  loyalty  of  his  ancestors; 
but,  unhappily,  goes  on  to  assert  that  '  the  Catholic  Church  has  always  held  and  taught  the 
infallibility  of  the  Pope  in  matters  of  faith  and  morals.'  No  :  the  Roman  Catholics  of  En- 
gland denied  it  in  their  Protestation  of  1788-9 ;  and  on  the  list  of  the  Committee  which 
prepared  and  promoted  that  Protestation  I  find  the  name  of  Peregrine  Towneley,  of  Towne- 
ley.—Ibid.,  vol.  ii.  p.  304, 

*  Butler,  Hist.  Memoirs,  vol.  ii.  pp.  119,  125. 

*  Ibid.,  vol.  ii.  pp.  136-8.  *  Flanagan,  vol.  ii.  p.  398. 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL  AND  INFALLIBILITY.  35 

material  fact  is  the  subscription  of  the  Protestation  by  the  clergy  and 
laity  at  large.  On  this  subject  he  admits  that  it  was  signed  by  ^  the 
greater  part  of  both  clergy  and  laity ;'  ^  and  states  that  an  organization 
in  opposition  to  the  Committee,  founded  in  1794  by  one  of  the  Yicars 
Apostolic,  died  a  natural  death  after  '  a  very  few  years.'  ^  The  most 
significant  part  of  the  case,  however,  is  perhaps  this :  that  the  work  of 
Flanagan,  which  aims  at  giving  a  tinge  of  the  new  historical  color  to 
the  opinions  of  the  Anglo-Roman  body,  was  not  published  until  1857, 
when  things  had  taken  an  altogether  new  direction,  and  when  the  Eman- 
cipation controversies  had  been  long  at  rest. 

The  Act  of  1791  for  England  was  followed  by  that  of  1793  for  Ire- 
land. The  Oath  inserted  in  this  Act  is  founded  upon  the  Declaration 
of  1757,  and  embodies  a  large  portion  of  it,  including  the  words : 

'  It  is  not  an  article  of  the  Catholic  Faith,  neither  am  I  thereby  required  to  believe  or  pro- 
fess, that  the  Pope  is  infallible.' 

I  refer  to  this  Oath,  not  because  I  attach  an  especial  value  to  that 
class  of  security,  but  because  we  now  come  to  a  Synodical  Declaration 
of  the  Irish  Bishops  which  constitutes  perhaps  the  most  salient  point 
of  the  whole  of  this  singular  history. 

On  the  26th  of  February,  1810,  those  Bishops  declared  as  follows : 

'  That  the  said  Oath,  and  the  promises,  declarations,  abjurations,  and  protestations  therein 
contained,  are,  notoriously,  to  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  at  large,  become  apart  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  religion  as  taught  hy  us  the  Bishops  and  received  and  maintained  by  the  Roman 
Catholic  Churches  in  Ireland ;  and  as  such  are  approved  and  sanctioned  by  the  other  Roman 
Catholic  Churches/^ 

It  will  now,  I  think,  have  sufficiently  appeared  to  the  reader  who  ha& 
followed  this  narration  how  mildly,  I  may  say  how  inadequately,  I  have 
set  forth  in  my  former  tract  the  pledges  which  were  given  by  the  au- 
thorities of  the  Eoman  Catholic  Church  to  the  Crown  and  State  of  the 
United  Kingdom,  and  by  means  of  which  principally  they  obtained 
the  remission  of  the  penal  laws  and  admission  to  full  civil  equality. 
We  were  told  in  England  by  the  Anglo- Eoman  Bishops,  clergy,  and 
laity  that  they  rejected  the  tenet  of  the  Pope's  infallibility.  We  were 
told  in  Ireland  that  they  rejected  the  doctrine  of  the  Pope's  temporal 
power,  whether  direct  or  indirect,  although  the  Pope  had  in  the  most 

^  Flanagan,  vol.  ii.  p.  394.  =*  Slater  on  Roman  Catholic  Tenets,  pp.  14, 15. 

^  Ibid.,  vol.  ii.  p.  407. 


SQ  VATICANISM. 

solemn  and  formal  manner  asserted  his  possession  of  it.  We  were  also 
told  in  Ireland  that  Papal  infallibility  was  no  part  of  the  Eoman  Catho- 
lic faith,  and  never  could  be  made  a  part  of  it ;  and  that  the  impossi- 
bility of  incorporating  it  in  their  religion  was  notorious  to  the  Eoman 
Catholic  Church  at  large,  and  was  become  part  of  their  religion,  and 
this  not  only  in  Ireland,  but  throughout  the  world.  These  are  the 
declarations,  which  reach  in  effect  from  1661  to  1810 ;  and  it  is  in  the 
light  of  these  declarations  that  the  evidence  of  Dr.  Doyle  in  1825,  and 
the  declarations  of  the  English  and  Irish  prelates  of  the  Papal  com- 
munion shortly  afterward,  are  to  be  read.  Here,  then,  is  an  extraordi- 
nary fullness  and  clearness  of  evidence,  reaching  over  nearly  two  centu- 
ries ;  given  by  and  on  behalf  of  millions  of  men ;  given  in  documents 
patent  to  all  the  world ;  perfectly  well  known  to  the  See  and  Court  of 
.Kome,  as  we  know  expressly  with  respect  to  merely  the  most  important 
of  all  these  assurances,  namely,  the  actual  and  direct  repudiation  of  in- 
fallibility in  1788-9.  So  that  either  that  See  and  Court  had  at  the 
last-named  date,  and  at  the  date  of  the  Synod  of  1810,  abandoned  the 
dream  of  enforcing  infallibility  on  the  Church,  or  else  by  willful  silence 
they  were  guilty  of  practicing  upon  the  British  Crown  one  of  the  black- 
est frauds  recorded  in  history. 

The  difficulties  now  before  us  were  fully  foreseen  during  the  sittings 
of  the  Council  of  1870.  In  the  Address  prepared  by  Archbishop  Ken- 
rick,  of  St.  Louis,  but  not  delivered,  because  a  stop  was  put  to  the  debate, 
•I  find  these  words: 

'  Quomodo  fides  sic  gubernio  Anglicano  data  conciliari  possit  cum  definitione  papalis  in- 
fallibilitatis  ....  ipsi  viderint  qui  ex  Episcopis  Hiberniensibus,  sicut  ego  ipse,  illud  jura- 
mentum  prsesliterint.'^ 

^In  what  way  the  pledge  thus  given  to  the  English  Government  can 
be  reconciled  with  the  definition  of  Papal  infallibility,  let  those  of  the 
Irish  Bishops  consider  who,  like  myself,  have  taken  the  oath  in  question.' 

The  oath  was,  I  presume,  that  of  1793.  However,  in  Friedberg's 
Sammlung  der  ActenstucJce  zum  Ooncil,  p.  151  (Tubingen,  1872),  I  find 
it  stated, I  hope  untruly, that  the  Civiltd  Cattolica^tliQ  prime  favorite  of 
Vaticanism,  in  Series  viii.  vol.  i.  p.  730,  announced  among  those  who  had 
submitted  to  the  Definition  the  name  of  Archbishop  Kenrick. 

'  Friedrich,  Doc,  ad  Illmt.  Cone,  Vat.  vol.  1.  p.  219. 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL  AND  INFALLIBILITY.  37 

Let  it  not,  however,  be  for  a  moment  supposed  that  I  mean  to  charge 
upon  those  who  gave  the  assurances  of  1661,  of  1Y57,  of  1783,  of  1793j 
of  1810,  of  1825-6,  the  guilt  of  falsehood.  I  have  Aot  a  doubt  that 
what  they  said  they  one  and  all  believed.  It  is  for  Archbishop  Man- 
ning  and  his  confederates,  not  for  me,  to  explain  how  these  things  have 
come  about ;  or  it  is  for  Archbishop  MacHale,  who  joined  as  a  Bishop 
in  the  assurances  of  1826,  and  who  then  stood  in  the  shadow  and  recent 
recollection  of  the  Synod  of  1810,  but  who  now  is  understood  to  have 
become  a  party,  by  promulgation,  to  the  Decree  of  the  Pope's  infalli- 
bility. There  are  but  two  alternatives  to  choose  between :  on  the  one 
side,  that  which  I  reject,  the  hypothesis  of  sheer  perjury  and  falsehood ; 
on  the  other,  that  policy  of  Violence  and  change  in  faith'  which  I 
charged,  and  stirred  so  much  wrath  by  charging,  in  my  former  tract.  I 
believed,  and  I  still  believe  it  to  be  the  true,  as  well  as  the  milder  ex^ 
planation.  It  is  for  those  who  reject  it  to  explain  their  preference  for 
the  other  solution  of  this  most  curious  problem  of  history.^ 

And  now  what  shall  we  say  to  that  coloring  power  of  imagination 
with  which  Dr.  Newman^  tints  the  wide  landscape  of  these  most  intract- 
able facts,  when  he  says  it  is  a  pity  the  Bishops  could  mot  have  antici- 
pated the  likelihood  that  in  1870  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  would  at- 
tach to  the  Christian  creed  the  Article  of  the  Pope's  infallibility.  A 
pity  it  may  be ;  but  it  surely  is  not  a  wonder :  because  they  told  us,  as 
a  fact  notorious  to  themselves,  and  to  the  whole  Eoman  Catholic  world, 
that  the  passing  of  such  a  decree  was  impossible.^  Let  us  reserve  our 
faculty  of  wonder  for  the  letter  of  an  Anglo-Eoman,  or,  if  he  prefers  it, 
Romano- Anglican  Bishop,  who  in  a  published  circular  presumes  to  term 
*  scandalous '  the  letter  of  an  English  gentleman,  because  in  that  letter 
he  had  declared  he  still  held  the  belief  which  in  1788-9  the  whole  body 
of  the  Roman  Catholics  of  England  assured  Mr.  Pitt  that  they  held  ;* 
and  let  us  learn  which  of  the  resources  of  theological  skill  will  avail  to 
bring  together  these  innovations,  and  the  serrvper  eadem  of  which  I  am, 
I  fear,  but  writing  the  lamentable  epitaph. 

*Non  bene  conveniunt,  nee  in  un^  sede  morantur.'* 


^  See  Appendices  D  and  E.  ^  Dr.  Newman,  p.  17.  ^  See  Appendix  D. 

*  Letter  of  Mr.  Petre  to  the  London  Times  of  Nov.  15, 1874 ;  of  Bishop  Vaughan,  Jan.  2, 1875. 

*  Ov.  MetamorpK 


38  VATICANISM. 

This  question  has  been  raised  by  me  primarily  as  a  British  question ; 
and  I  hope  that,  so  far  as  this  country  is  concerned,  I  have  done  some- 
thing to  throw  light  upon  the  question  whether  Papal  infallibility  was 
or  was  not  matter  of  Divine  Faith  before  1870;  and  consequently  on 
the  question  whether  the  Vatican  Decrees  have  Mn  no  jot  or  tittle'  al- 
tered the  conditions  of  civil  allegiance  in  connection  with  this  infalli- 
bility.i 

The  declaration  of  the  Irish  prelates  in  1810  w^as  a  full  assurance  to 
us  that  what  they  asserted  for  their  country  was  also  asserted  for  the 
whole  Romish  world. 

•  But  as  evidence  has  been  produced  which  goes  directly  into  antiqui- 
ty, and  arguments  have  been  made  to  show  how  innocuous  is  the  new- 
fangled form  of  religion,  I  proceed  to  deal  with  such  evidence  and  ar- 
gument in  regard  to  my  twofold  contention  against  the  Decrees — 

•  1.  In  respect  to  infallibility. 
2.  In  respect  to  obedience. 


IV.  The  Vatican  Council  and  the  Infallibility  of  the  Pope. — 

Continued. 
Breach  with  History,  I^o.  2. 

In  a  single  instance,  I  have  to  express  my  regret  for  a  statement  made 
with  culpable  inadvertence.  It  is  in  p.  28  (Am.  ed.  p.  22),  where  I  have 
stated  that  the  Popes  had  kept  up  their  claim  to  dogmatic  infallibility 
with  comparativtsly  little  intermission  'for  well-nigh  one  thousand  years.' 
I  can  not  even  account  for  so  loose  an  assertion,  except  by  the  fact  that 
the  point  lay  out  of  the  main  line  of  my  argument,  and  thus  the  slip 
of  the  pen  once  made  escaped  correction.  Of  the  claim  to  a  suprema- 
cy virtually  absolute,  which  I  combined  with  the  other  claim,  the  state- 
ment is  true ;  for  this  may  be  carried  back,  perhaps,  to  the  ninth  cent- 
ury and  the  appearance  of  the  false  Decretals.  That  was  the  point 
which  entered  so  largely  into  the  great  conflicts  of  the  Middle  Ages. 
It  is  the  point  which  I  have  treated  as  the  more  momentous ;  and  the 
importance  of  the  tenet  of  infallibility  in  faith  and  morals  seems  to 

^  For  a  practical  indication  of  the  effect  produced  by  the  Roman  Catholic  disclaimers,  now 
denounced  as  '  scandalous, '  see  Appendix  E. 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL  AND  INFALLIBILITY.  39 

me  to  arise  chiefly  from  its  aptitude  for  combination  with  the  other. 
As  matter  of  fact,  the  stability  and  great  authority  of  the  Eoman 
Church  in  controversies  of  faith  were  acknowledged  generally  from  an 
early  period.  But  the  heresy  of  Honorius,  to  say  nothing  of  other 
Popes,  became,  from  his  condemnation  by  a  General  Council,  and  by  a 
long  series  of  Popes  as  well  as  by  other  Councils,  a  matter  so  notori- 
ous that  it  could  not  fade  from  the  view  even  of  the  darkest  age;  and 
the  possibility  of  an  heretical  Pope  grew  to  be  an  idea  perfectly  famil- 
iar to  the  general  mind  of  Christendom.  Hence  in  the  Bull  Cum 
ex  Apostolatus  Officio^  Paul  lY.  declares  (1559)  that  if  a  heretic  is 
chosen  as  Pope,  all  his  acts  shall  be  void  «5  initio.  All  Christians  are 
absolved  from  their  obedience  to  him,  and  enjoined  to  have  recourse  to 
the  temporal  power.^  So  likewise  in  the  Decretals  themselves  it  is 
provided  that  the  Pope  can  only  be  brought  to  trial  in  case  he  is  found 
to  deviate  from  the  faith.^ 

It  is  an  opinion  held  by  great  authorities  that  no  pontiff  before  Leo 
X.  attempted  to  set  up  the  infallibility  of  Popes  as  a  dogma.  Of  the  ci- 
tations in  its  favor  which  are  arrayed  by  Archbishop  Manning  in  his 
Privilegium  Petri ^  I  do  not  perceive  any  earlier  than  the  thirteenth 
century  which  appear  so  much  as  to  bear  upon  the  question.^  There 
is  no  Conciliary  declaration,  as  I  need  scarcely  add,  of  the  doctrine. 
This  being  so,  the  point  is  not  of  primary  importance.  The  claim  is 
one  thing,  its  adoption  by  the  Church,  and  the  interlacing  of  it  with  a 
like  adoption  of  the  claim  to  obedience,  are  another.  I  do  not  deny  to 
the  opinion  of  Papal  infallibility  an  active,  though  a  checkered  and  in- 
termittent life  exceeding  six  centuries. 

Since,  then,  I  admit  that  for  so  long  a  time  the  influences'  now  tri- 
umphant in  the  Koman  Church  have  been  directed  towards  the  end 
they  have  at  last  attained,  and  seeing  that  my  statement  as  to  the  liber- 
ty which  prevailed  before  1870  has  been  impugned,  I  am  bound  to  of- 
fer some  proof  of  that  statement.  I  will  proceed,  in  this  instance  as  in 
others,  by  showing*  that  my  allegation  is  much  within  the  truth :  "that 
not  only  had  \hQ  Latin  Church  forborne  to  adopt  the  tract  of  Papal  in- 


^  Von  Schulte,  Power  of  the  Popes,  vol.  iv.  p.  30. 

*  '  Hujus  culpas  istic  redarguere  praesumit  mortalium  nullus,  quia  cunctos  ipse  judicaturus 
a  nemine  est  judicandus,  nisi  deprehendatur  ajide  devius.^    Deer.  i.  Dist.  xl.  c.  vi. 
^  Petri  Privilegium,  vol.  ii.  pp.  70-91. 


40  VATICANISM. 

fallibility,  but  that  she  was  rather  bound  by  consistency  with  her  own 
principles,  as  recorded  in  history,  to  repel  and  repudiate  that,  tenet.  I 
refer  to  the  events  of  the  great  epoch  marked  by  the  Council  of  Con- 
stance. And  the  proof  of  the  state  of  facts  with  regard  to  that  epoch 
will  also  be  proof  of  my  more  general  allegation  that  the  Church  of 
Rome  does  not  keep  good  faith  with  history,  as  it  is  handed  down  to 
her,  and  marked  out  for  her,  by  her  own  annals.  I  avoided  this  dis- 
cussion in  the  former  tract,  because  it  is  necessarily  tinctured  with  the- 
ology ;  but  the  denial  is  a  challenge,  which  I  can  not  refuse  to  take  up. 

It  is  alleged  that  certain  of  my  assertions  may  be  left  to  confute 
one  another.  I  will  show  that  they  are  perfectly  consistent  with  one 
another. 

The  first  of  them  charged  on  Vaticanism  that  it  had  disinterred 
and  brought  into  action  the  extravagant  claims  of  Papal  authority, 
which  were  advanced  by  Popes  at  the  climax  of  their  power,  but  which 
never  entered  into  the  faith  even  of  the  Latin  Church. 

The  second,  that  it  had  added  two  if  not  three  new  articles  to  the 
Christian  Creed :  the  two  articles  of  the  Immaculate  Conception  and 
of  Papal  Infallibility ;  with  what  is  at  least  a  new  law  of  Christian 
obligation — the  absolute  duty  of  all  Christians  and  all  Councils  to  obey 
the  Pope  in  his  decrees  and  commands,  even  where  fallible,  over  the 
whole  domain  of  faith,  morals,  and  the  government  and  discipline  of 
the  Church.  This  law  is  now  for  the  first  time,  I  believe,  laid  down 
by  the  joint  and  infallible  authority  of  Pope  and  Council.  Dr.  ISTew- 
man^  wonders  that  I  should  call  the  law  absolute.  I  call  it  absolute 
because  it  is  without  exception  and  without  limitation. 

To  revive  obsolete  claims  to  authority,  and  to  innovate  in  matter  of 
belief,  are  things  perfectly  compatible  :  we  have  seen  them  disastrous- 
ly combined.  In  such  innovation  is  involved,  as  I  will  now  show,  a 
daring  breach  with  history. 

While  one  portion  of  the  Roman  theologians  have  held  the  infalli- 
bility of  the  Pope,  many  others  have  taught  that  an  (Ecumenical  Coun- 
cil, together  with  a  Pope,  constitutes  jper  se  an  infallible  authority  in 
faith  and  morals.  I  believe  it  to  be  also  true  that  it  was,  down  to  that 
disastrous  date,  compatible  with  Roman  orthodoxy  to  hold  that  not 


^  Dr.  Newman,  pp.  45,  53. 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL  AND  INFALLIBILITY.  41 

even  a  Pope  and  a  Council  united  could  give  the  final  seal  of  certain- 
ty to  a  definition,  and  that  for  this  end  there  was  further  necessary  the 
sanction,  by  acceptance,  of  the  Church  diffused.  This  last  opinion, 
however,  seems  to  have  gone  quite  out  of  fashion ;  and  I  now  address 
myself  to  the  position  in  argument  of  those  who  hold  that  in  the  de- 
cree of  a  Council,  approved  by  the  Pope,  the  character  of  infallibility 
resides. 

Both  the  Council  of  Constance  and  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  were 
in  the  Poman  sense  CEcumenical ;  and  it  is  this  class  of  councils  alone 
that  is  meant  where  infallibility  is  treated  of.  I  shall  endeavor  to  be 
brief,  and  to  use  the  simplest  language.  • 

The  Council  of  the  Vatican  decreed  (chap,  iii.)  that  the  Pope  had 
from  Christ  immediate  power  over  the  universal  Church  (par.  ii.). 

That  all  were  bound  to  obey  him,  of  whatever  rite  and  dignity,  col- 
lectively as  well  as  individually  (cujioscunque  ritHs  et  dignitatis  .  .  . 
tain  seoTsum  singulis  guam  simul  omnes. — Ibid.). 

That  this  duty  of  obedience  extended  to  all  matters  of  faith,  of 
morals,  and  of  the  discipline  and  government  of  the  Church  (Ibid.,  and 
par.  iv.). 

That  in  all  ecclesiastical  causes  he  is  judge,  without  appeal  or  pos- 
sibility of  reversal  (par.  iv.). 

That  the  definftions  of  the  Pope  in  faith  and  morals,  delivered  ex 
cathedra^  are  irreformable,  and  are  invested  with  the  infallibility  grant- 
ed by  Christ  in  the  said  subject-matter  to  the  Church  (chap.  iv.). 

Now  let  us  turn  to  the  Council  of  Constance. 

This  Council,  supported 'by  the  following  Council  of  Basle  before 
its  translation  to  Ferrara,  had  decreed  in  explicit  terms  that  it  had 
from  Christ  immediate  power  over  the  universal  Church,  of  which  it 
was  the  representative. 

That  all  were  bound  to  obey  it,  of  whatever  state  and  dignity,  even 
if  Papal,  in  all  matters  pertaining  to  faith,  or  to  the  extirpation  of  the 
subsisting  schism,  or  to  the  reformation  of  the  Church  in  its  head  and 
its  members.! 

In  conformity  herewith,  the  Council  of  Constance  cited,  as  being  it- 
self a  superior  authority,  three  Popes  to  its  bar.     Gregory  XII.  antici- 

1  Labbe,  Concilia^  vol.  xii,  p.  22,  ed.  Paris,  1672. 


42  VATICANISM. 

pated  his  sentence  by  resignation.  Benedict  XIII.  was  deposed,  as 
was  John  XXIII.,  for  divers  crimes  and  offenses,  but  not  for  heresy. 
Having  thus  made  void  the  Papal  Chair,  the  Council  elected  thereto 
Pope  Martin  Y. 

It  is  not  my  object  to  attempt  a  general  appreciation  of  the  Council 
of  Constance.  There  is  much  against  it  to  be  said  from  many  points 
of  view,  if  there  be  more  for  it.  But  I  point  out  that,  for  the  matter 
now  in  hand,  the  questions  of  fact  are  clear,  and  that  its  decrees  are 
in  flat  and  diametrical  contradiction  to  those  of  the  Yatican. 

This  of  itself  would  not  constitute  any  difficulty  for  Koman  theolo- 
gy, and  WQjild  give  no  proof  of  its  breach  with  history.  It  is  admitted 
on  all  or  nearly  all  hands  that  a  Council,  however  great  its  authority 
may  be,  is  not  of  itself  infallible.  What  really  involves  a  fatal  breach 
with  history  is,  when  a  body,  which  professes  to  appeal  to  it,  having 
proclaimed  a  certain  organ  to  be  infallible,  then  proceeds  to  ascribe  to 
it  to-day  an  utterance  contradictory  to  its  utterance  of  yesterday  ;  and, 
thus  depriving  it  not  only  of  all  certainty,  but  of  all  confidence,  lays 
its  honor  prostrate  in  the  dust.  This  can  only  be  brought  home  to 
the  Eoman  Church,  if  two  of  her  Councils,  contradicting  one  another 
in  the  subject-matter  of  faith  or  morals,  have  each  respectively  been 
confirmed  by  the  Pope,  and  have  thus  obtained,  in  Roman  eyes,  the 
stamp  of  infallibility.  Now  this  is  what  I  charge  fu  the  present  in- 
stance. 

It  is  not  disputed,  but  loudly  asseverated,  by  Yaticanists  that  the 
Council  of  the  Yatican  has  been  approved  and  confirmed  by  the  Pbpe. 

But  an  allegation  has  been  set  up  that  the  Council  of  Constance  did 
not  receive  that  confirmation  in  respect  to  the  Decree  of  the  Fiftli  Ses- 
sion which  asserted  its  power,  given  by  Christ,  over  the  Pope.  Bishop 
UUathorne  says : 

*  Although  the  mode  of  proceeding  in  that  Council  was  really  informal,  inasmuch  as  its 
members  voted  by  nations,  a  portion  of  its  doctrinal  decrees  obtained  force  through  the  dog- 
matic Constitution  of  Martin  V. '  ^ 

Here  it  is  plainly  implied  that  the  Decree  of  the  Fifth  ^Session  was 
not  confirmed.  And  I  have  read  in  some  Ultramontane  production 
of  the  last  three  months  an  exulting  observation  that  the  Decrees  of 

*  Expostulation  Unraveled,  p.  42. 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL  AND  INFALLIBILITY.  43 

the  Fourth  and  Fifth  Sessions  were  not  confirmed  by  the  Pope,  and 
that .  thus,  I  presume  lil^e  the  smitten  fig-tree,  they  have  remained  a 
dead  letter.  Let  us  examine  this  allegation  ;  but  not  that  other  state- 
ment of  Archbishop  Manning  that  the  proceeding  was  null  from  the 
nullity  of  the  assembly,  the  irregularity  of  the  voting,  and  the  hetero- 
doxy of  the  matter.^  The  Pope's  confirmation  covers  and  disposes  of 
all  these  arbitrary  pleas.  Whether  it  did  so  or  not,  is  to  be  tried  by 
the  evidence  of  authoritative  documents. 

In  the  record  of  the  Council  of  Constance  we  are  told  that,  in  its 
Forty-fifth  Session,  the  Pope  declared,  not  that,  he  confirmied  a  part  of 
its  doctrinal  decrees,  but  'that  he  would  hold  and  inviolably  observe, 
and  never  counteract  in  any  manner,  each  and  all  of  the  things  which 
the  Council  had  in  full  assembly  determined,  concluded,  and  decreed 
in  matters  of  faith  (m  materiis  fidei)^'^  And  he  approves  and  ratifies 
accordingly. 

Embracing  all  the  decrees  described  in  its  scope,  this  declaration  is 
in  tone  as  much  an  adhesion,  as  a  confirmation  by  independent  or  su- 
perior authority.  But  let  that  pass.  Evidently  it  gives  all  that  the 
Pope  had  in  his  power  to  give. 

,  The  only  remaining  question  is,  whether  the  Decree  of  the  Fifth 
Session  was,  or  was  not,  a  decree  of  faith  ? 

'  Now  upon  this  question  there  are  at  least  two  independent  lines  of 
argument,  each  of  which,  respectively  and  separately,  is  fatal  to  the  Ul- 
tramontane contention:  this  contention  being  that, for  want  of  the  con- 
firmation of  Pope  Martin  Y.,  that  Decree  fell  to  the  ground. 
,  First :  Pope  Martin  Y.  derived  his  whole  power  to  confirfti  from  his 
election  to  the  Papal  Chair  by  the  Council..  And  the  Council  was  com- 
petent to  elect,  because  the  See  was  vacant.  And  the  See  was  vacant, 
because  of  the  depositions  of  the  three  rival  Popes ;  for  if  the  See  was 
truly  vacant  before,  there  had  been  no  Pope  since  the  schism  of  1378, 
w^hich  is  not  supposed  by  either  side.  But  the  power  of  the  Council  to 
vacate  the  See  was  in  virtue  of  the  principle  asserted  by  the  Dfecree  of 
the  Fifth  Session.  "We  arrive  then  at  the  following  dilemma.  Eitlier 
that  Decree  had  full  validity  by  the  confirmation  of  the  Pope,  or  Mar- 
tin the  Fifth  was  not  a  Pope;  the  Cardinals  made  or  confirmed  by  him 

'  Petri  Privilegium,  ii.  95. 

^  Labbe,  Concilia,  vol.  xii.  p.  258.     See  Appendix  F  for  the  most  important  passages. 


44  VATICANISM. 

were  not  Cardinals,  and  could  not  elect  validly  his  successor,  Eugene 
lY. ;  so  that  the  Papal  succession  has  failed  since  an  early  date  in  the 
fifteenth  century,  or  more  than  four  hundred  and  fifty  years  ago. 

Therefore  the  Decree  of  the  Fifth  Council  must  upon  Roman  princi- 
ples have  been  included  in  the  raaterioi  fidei  determined  by  the  Coun- 
cil, and  was  confirmed  by  Pope  Martin  Y. 

But  again.  It  has  been  held  by  some  Roman  writers  that  Pope 
Martin  Y.  only  confirmed  the  Decrees  touching  Faith ;  that  the  Decree 
of  the  Fifth  Session  did  not  touch  Faith,  but  only  Church-government, 
and  that  accordingly  it  remained  unconfirmed. 

Now  in  the  Apostles'  Creed,  and  in  the  Mcene  Creed,  we  all  express 
belief  in  the  Holy  Catholic  Church.  Its  institution  and  existence  are 
therefore  strictly  matter  of  faith.  How  can  it  be  reasonably  contend- 
ed that  the  organized  body  is  an  article  of  faith,  but  that  the  seat  of  its 
vital,  sovereign  power,  by  and  from  which  it  becomes  operative  for  be- 
lief and  conduct,  belongs  to  the  inferior  region  of  the  ever  mutable 
discipline  of  the  Church  ? 

But  this  is  argument  only;  and  we  have  a  more  sure  criterion  at 
command,  which  will  convict  Yaticanism  for  the  present  purpose  out 
of  its  own  mouth.  Yaticanism  has  effectually  settled  this  question  as 
against  itself ;  for  it  has  declared  that  the  Papal  Infallibility  is  a 
dogma  of  Faith  (divinitits  revelatwn  dogma,  'Const.'  ch.  iv.).  But 
if  by  this  definition,  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope  in  definitions  of  faith 
belongs  to  the  province  of  materice  fidei  and  of  ea  quce  jpertinent  ad 
fidem,  the  negative  of  the  proposition  thus  affirmed,  being  in  the  same 
subject-mfftter,  belongs  to  the  same  province.  It  therefore  seems  to 
follow,  by  a  demonstration  perfectly  rigorous — 

1.  That  Pope  Martin  Y.  confirmed  (or  adopted)  a  Decree  which  de- 
clares the  judgments  and  proceedings  of  the  Pope,  in  matters  of  faith, 
without  exception,  to  be  reformable,  and  therefore  fallible. 

2.  That  Pope  Pius  IX.  confirmed  (and  proposed)  a  Decree  which 
declares  certain  judgments  of  the  Pope,  in  matters  of  faith  and  morals, 
to  be  infallible;  and  these,  with  his  other  judgments  in  faith,  morals, 
and  the  discipline  and  government  of  the  Church,  to  be  irreformable. 

3.  That  the  new  oracle  contradicts  the  old,  and  again  the  Roman 
Church  has  broken  with  history  in  contradicting  itself. 

4.  That  no  oracle  which  contradicts  itself  is  an  infallible  oracle. 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL  AND  INFALLIBITY.  45 

5.  That  a  so-called  (Ecumenical  Council  of  the  Roman  Church,  con- 
firmed or  non-confirmed  by  the  Pope,  has,  upon  its  own  showing,  no 
valid  claim  to  infallible  authority. 

The  gigantic  forgeries  of  the  false  Decretals,  the  general  contempt 
of  Yaticanism  for  history,  are  subjects  far  too  wide  for  me  to  touch. 
But  for  the  present  I  leave  my  assertion  in  this  matter  to  stand  upon — 

1.  The  case  of  the  Eoman  Catholics  of  the  United  Kingdom  before 
1829. 

2.  The  Decrees  of  the  Council  of  Constance,  compared  with  the 
Decrees  of  the  Council  of  the  Vatican. 

When  these  assertions  are  disposed  of,  it  will  be  time  enough  to 
place  others  in  the  rank.  I  will  now  say  a  word  on  the  cognate  sub- 
ject of  Gallicanism,  which  has  also  been  brought  upon  the  carpet. 

It  would  be  unreasonable  to  expect  from  Archbishop  Manning 
greater  accuracy  in  his  account  of  a  foreign  Church  than  he  has  'ex- 
hibited with  regard  to  the  history  of  the  communion  over  which  he 
energetically  presides. 

•  As  the  most  famous  and  distinct  of  its  manifestations  was  that  ex- 
hibited in  the  Four  Articles  of  1682,  it  has  pleased  the  Archbishop  to 
imagine,  and  imagining  to  state,  that  in  that  year  Gallicanism  took  its 
rise.  Even  with  the  help  of  this  airy  supposition,  he  has  to  admit 
that  in  the  Church  where  all  is  unity,  certainty,  and  authority,  a  doc- 
trine contrary  to  divine  faith,  yet  proclaimed  by  the  Church  of  France^, 
was,  for  want  of  a  General  Council,  tolerated  for  one  hundred  and 
eighty-eight  years.  Indeed,  he  alleges?'. the.  errors  of  the  Council  of 
Constance,  four  hundred  and  sixty  years  ago,  as  a  reason  for.  the  Coun- 
cil of  t*he  Vatican. 

'  ]^or  were  Catholics  free  to  deny  his  infallibility  before  1870.    The 
denial  of  his  infallibility  had  indeed  never  been  condemned  by  a  defi-  * 
nition,  because  since  the  rise  of  Gallicanism  in  1682  no  (Ecumenical 
Council  had  ever  been  convoked.'^ 

I  will  not  stop  to,  inquire  why,  if  the  Pope  has  all  this  time  been  in- 
fallible, a  Council  was  necessary  for  the  issuing  of  a  definition ;  since 
we  are  now  on  matters  of  history,  and  the  real  difficulty  would  be  to 
know  where  to  dip  into  the  prior  history  of  France  without  finding 

'  Petri  Privilegium^  ii.  40. 

^  Letter  to  Macmillan's  Magazine,  Oct.  22, 1874. 


46  VATICANISM. 

matter  in  utter  contradiction  to  the  Archbishop's  allegation.  An  An- 
glo-Koraan  writer  has  told  us  that  in  the  year  1612  [query  1614?]  the 
assembly  of  the  Gallican  Church  declared  that  the  power  of  the  Popes 
related  to  spiritual  matters  and  eternal  life,  not  to  civil  concerns  and 
temporal  possessions.^  In  the  year  1591,  at  Mantes  and  Chartres,  the 
prelates  of  France  in  their  assembly  refused  the  order  of  the  Pope  to 
quit  the  king,  and  on  the  21st  of  September  repudiated  his  Bulls,  as 
being  null  in  substance  and  in  form.^  It  has  always  been  understood 
that  the  French  Church  played  a  great  part  in  the  Council  of  Con- 
stance ;  is  this  also  to  be  read  backward,  or  effaced  from  the  records  ? 
Or,  to  go  a  little  farther  back,  the  Council  of  Paris  in  1393  withdrew 
its  obedience  altogether  from  Benedict  XIII.,  without  transferring  it 
to  his  rival  at  Rome;  restored  it  upon  conditions  in  1403;  again  with- 
drew it,  because  the  conditions  had  not  been  fulfilled,  in  1406 ;  and  so 
remained  until  the  Council  of  Constance  and  the  election  of  Martin  Y.^ 
And  what  are  we  to  say  to  Fleury,  who  writes : 

*Le  concile  de  Constance  etablit  la  maxime  de  tout  tewps  enseign^e  en  France,  que  tout 
Pape  est  soumis  au  jugement  de  tout  concile  universel  en  ce  qui  conceme  la  foi. '  * 

One  of  the  four  articles  of  1682  simply  reaiHrms  the  decree  of  Con- 
stance ;  and  as  Archbishop  Manning  has  been  the  first,  so  he  will  prob- 
ably be  the  last  person  to  assert  that  Gallicanism  took  its  rise  in  1682. 

This  is  not  the  place  to  show  how  largely,  if  less  distinctly,  the  spirit 
of  what  are  called  the  Gallican  liberties  entered  into  the  ideas  and  in- 
stitutions of  England,  Germany,  and  even  Spain.  Neither  will  I  dwell 
on  the  manner  in  which  the  decrees  of  Constance  ruled  for  a  time  not 
only  the  minds  of  a  school  or  party,  but  the  policy  of  the  Western 
Church  at  large,  and  proved  their  eflftcacy  and  sway  by  the  remarkable 
submission  of  Eugenius  lY.  to  the  Council  of  Basle.  But  I  will  cite 
*  the  single  sentence  in  which  Mr.  Hallam,  writing,  alas,  nearly  sixty 
years  back,  has  summed  up  the  case  of  the  decrees  of  Constance : 

'  These  decrees  are  the  great  pillars  of  that  moderate  theory  with  respect  to  the  Papal  au- 
thority which  distinguished  the  Gallican  Church,  and  is  embraced,  I  presume,  by  almost  all 
laymen,  and  the  major  part  of  ecclesiastics,  on  this  side  the  Alps.'^ 

^  Cited  in  Slater's  Letters,  p.  23,  from  Hook's  Principia,  iii.  577. 

=  Continuator  of  Fleury,  Hist.  Eccl,  xxxvi.,  337  (Book  160,  ch.  84). 

'  Du  Chastenet,  Nouvelle  Histoire  du  Cone,  de  Constance  (Preface) ;  and  Preuves,  pp.  79, 
84  sqq.,  95,  479  (Paris,  1718). 

*  Fleury,  Nouv.  Opusc.  p.  44,  cited  in  Demaistre,  Z)u  Pape,  p.  82.  See  also  Fleury,  Hist. 
Eccl.(Bookl02,  ch.  188). 

'  Hist,  of  the  Middle  Ages,  ch.  vii.  part  2. 


OBEDIENCE  TO  THE  POPE.  47 

•  » 

Y.  The  Yatican  Council  and  Obedience  to  the  Pope. 

Archbishop  Manning  has  boldly  grappled  with  my  proposition  that 
the  Third  Chapter  of  the  Yatican  Decrees  had  forged  new  chains  for 
the  Cliristian  people,  in  regard  to  obedience,  by  giving  its  authority  to 
what  was  previously  a  claim  of  the  Popes  only,  and  so  making  it  a 
claim  of  the  Church.  He  is  astonished  at  the  statement :  and  he  offers^ 
what  he  thinks  a  sufficient  confutation  of  it  in  six  citations. 

The  four  last  of  these  begin  with  Innocent  III.,  and  end  with  the 
Council  of  Trent.  Innocent  III.  and  Sixtus  lY.  simply  claim  the  reg- 
imen^  or  government  of  the  Church,  which  no  one  denies  them.  The 
Council  of  Florence  speaks  oi plena  ■potestas,  and  the  Council  of  Trent 
of  swprema  potestas,  as  belonging  to  the  Pope.  Neither  of  these  as- 
sertions touch  the  point.  Full  power,  and  supreme  power,  in  the  gov- 
ernment of  a  body,  may  still  be  limited  by  law.  No  other  power  call 
be  above  them.  But  it  does  not  follow  that  they  can  command  from 
all  persons  an  unconditional  obedience,  unless  themselves  empowered 
by  law  so  to  do.  We  are  familiar,  under  the  British  monarchy,  both 
with  the  term  supreme  and  with  its  limitation. 

The  Archbishop,  however,  quotes  a  Canon  or  Chapter  of  a  Roman 
Council  in  863,  which  anathematizes  all  who  despise  the  Pope's  orders 
with  much  breadth  and  amplitude  of  phrase.  If  taken  without  the 
context,  it  fully  covers  the  ground  taken  by  the  Yatican  Council.  It 
anathematizes  all  who  contemn  the  decrees  of  the  Roman  See  in  faith, 
discipline,  or  correction  of  manners,  or  for  the  remedy  or  prevention  of 
mischief.  Considering  that  the  four  previous  Canons  of  this  Council, 
and  the  whole  proceedings,  relate  entirely  to  the  case  of  the  Divorce 
of  Lothair,  it  might,  perhaps,  be  argued  that  the  whole  constitute  only 
Q.  privilegium,  or  law  for  the  individual  case,  and  that  the  anathema 
of  the  Fifth  Canon  must  be  limited  to  those  who  set  at  naught  the 
Pope's  proceedings  in  that  case.  But  the  point  is  of  small  consequence 
to  my  argument. 

But  then  the  Roman  Council  is  local,  and  adds  no  very  potent  rein- 
forcement to  the  sole  authority  of  the  Pope..  The  question  then  re- 
mains how  to  secure  for  this  local  and  Papal  injunction  the  sanction 

*  Archbishop  Manning,  pp.  12,  13, 


:  i -RSiTT 

43  ---...^LLii--^^  VATICANISM. 

of  the  Universal  Church,  in  the  Roman  sense  of  the  word.  Archbish- 
op Manning,  perfectly  sensible  of  what  is  required  of  him,  writes  that 
'this  Canon  was  recognized  in  the  Eighth  General  Council  held  at 
Constantinople  in  869.'  He  is  then  more  than  contented  with  this  ar- 
ray of  proofs  ;  and,  confining  himself,  as  I  am  bound  to  say  he  does  in 
all  personal  matters  throughout  his  work,  to  the  mildest  language  con- 
sistent with  the  full  expression  of  his  ideas,  he  observes  that  I  am  man- 
ifestly out  of  my  depth. ^ 

I  know  not  the  exact  theological  value  of  the  term  'recognized;' 
but  I  conceive  it  to  mean  virtual  adoption.  Such  an  adoption  of  such 
a  claim  by  a  General  Council  appeared  to  me  a  fact  of  the  utmost  sig- 
nificance. I  referred  to  many  historians  of  the  Church ;  but  I  found 
no  notice  of  it  in  those  whom  I  consulted,  including  Baronius.  From 
these  unproductive  references  I  went  onwards  to  the  original  documents. 
•  The  Eighth  General  Council,  so  called,  comprised  only  those  Bish- 
ops of  the  East  who  adhered  to  and  were  supported  by  the  See  of 
Kome  and  the  Patriarch  Ignatius  in  the  great  conflict  of  the  ninth 
century.  It  would  not,  therefore,  have  been  surprising  if  its  canons 
had  given  some  at  least  equivocal  sanction  to  the  high  Papal  claims. 
But,  on  the  contrary,  they  may  be  read  with  the  greatest  interest  as 
showing,  at  the  time  immediately  bordering  on  the  publication  of  the 
false  Decretals,  how  little  way  those  claims  had  made  in  the  general 
body  of  the  Church.  The  system  which  they  describe  is  the  Patri- 
archal, not  the  Papal  system;  the  fivefold  distribution  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church  under  the  ^ve  great  Sees  of  the  Elder  and  the  l^ew 
Eome,  Alexandria,  Antioch,  and  Jerusalem.  Of  these  the  Pope  of 
Pome  is  the  first,  but  as  jprimzcs  inter  pares  (Canons  XYIL,  XXI,, 
Lat.).2  The  causes  of  clergy  on  appeal  are  to  be  finally  decided  by 
the  Patriarch  in  each  Patriarchate  (Canon  XXYL,  Lat.)  f  and  it  is  de- 
clared that  any  General  Council  has  authority  to  deal,  but  should  deal 
respectfully,  with  controversies  of  or  touching  the  Poman  Church  it- 
self (Canon  XXI.  Lat.,  XIII.  Gr.).*  This  is  one  of  the  Councils  which 
solemnly  anathematizes  Pope  Honorius  as  a  heretic. 

^  Archbishop  Manning,  Vatican  Decrees^  pp.  12,  13. 
»  Labbe  (ed.  Paris,  1671),  vol.  x.  pp.  1136, 1140. 
=>  Ibid.,  p.  1143. 
*  Ibid.,  pp.  1140, 1375. 


OBEDIENCE  TO  THE  POPE.  49 

The  reference  made  by  Archbishop  Manning  is,  as  he  has  had  the 
goodness  to  inform  me,  to  the  Second  Canon.'  The  material  words 
are  these : 

'  Regarding  the  most  blessed  Pope  Nicolas  as  an  organ  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  likewise 
his  most  holy  successor  Adrian,  we  accordingly  define  and  enact  that  all  which  they  have  set 
out  and  promulgated  synodically  from  time  to  time,  as  well  for  the  defense  and  well-being 
of  the  Church  of  Constantinople,  and  of  its  Chief  Priest  and  most  holy  Patriarch  Ignatius, 
as  likewise  for  the  expulsion  and  condemnation  of  Photius,  neophyte  and  intruder,  he  always 
observed  and  kept  alike  entire  and  untouched,  under  (or  according  to)  the  heads  set  forth 
(cu7n  expositis  capitulis).^ 

There  is  not  in  the  Canon  any  thing  relating  to  the  Popes  generally, 
but  only  to  two  particular  Popes ;  nor  any  reference  to  what  tliey  did 
personally,  but  only  to  what  they  did  synodically ;  nor  to  what  they 
did  synodically  in  all  matters,  but  only  in  the  controversy  with  Pho- 
tius and  the  Eastern  Bishops  adhering  to  him.  There  is  not  one  word 
relating  to  the  Canon  of  863,  or  to  the  Council  which  passed  it:  which 
was  a  Council  having  nothing  to  do  with  the  Photiau  controversy,  but 
called  for  the  purpose  of  supporting  Pope  N^icholas  I.  in  what  is  com- 
monly deemed  his  righteous  policy  with  respect  to  the  important  case 
of  the  Divorce  of  Lothair.^ 

So  that  the  demonstration  of  the  Archbishop  falls  wholly  to.  the 
ground;  and  down  to  this  time  my  statement  remains  entire  and  un- 
hurt. The  matter  contained  in  it  will  remain  very  important  until 
the  Council  or  the  Pope  shall  amend  its  decree  so  as  to  bring  it  into 
conformity  with  the  views  of  Dr.  Newman,  and  provide  a  relief  to  the 
private  conscience  by  opening  in  the  great  gate  of  Obedience  a  little 
wicket-door  of  exceptions  for  those  who  are  minded  to  disobe3\ 

Had  tlie  Decrees  of  1870  been  in  force  in  the  sixteenth  and  seven- 
teenth centuries,  Koman  Catholic  peers  could  not  have  done  what,  un- 
til the  reign  of  Charles  II.,  they  did ;  could  not  have  made  their  way 
to  the  House  of  Lords  by  taking  the  oath  of  allegiance,  despite  the 
Pope's  command.  But  that  is  not  all.  The  Pope  ex  cathedra  had 
bidden  the  Poman  Catholics  of  England  in  the  eighteenth  century, 
and  in  the  sixteenth,  and  from  the  fourteenth,  to  believe  in  the  De- 


^  Ibid.  p.  1127  Lat.,  p.  13G7  Gr. ;  where  the  reader  should  be  on  his  guard  against  the 
Latin  version,  and  look  to  the  Greek  original. 
*  See  the  original  in  Appendix  G. 
^  Labbe,  vol.  x.  pp.  7G6  sqq. 

D 


50  VATICANISM. 

posing  power  as  an  article  of  faith.  But  they  rejected  it;  and  the 
highest  law  of  their  Church  left  them  free  to  reject  it.  Has  it  not 
bound  them  now  ?  Tlie  Pope  in  the  sixteenth  century  bade  the  Eo- 
raan  Catholics  of  England  assist  the  invasion  of  the  Spanish  Armada. 
They  disobeyed  him.  The  highest  law  of  their  Church  left  them  free 
to  disobey.  Are  they  free  now  ?  That  they  will  assert  this  freedom 
for  themselves  I  do  not  question — nay,  I  entirely  believe.  From  every 
standing-point,  except  that  of  Vaticanism,  their  title  to  it  is  perfect. 
With  Vaticanism  to  supply  their  premise,  how  are  they  to  conclude  ? 
Dr.  Newman  says  there  are  exceptions  to  this  precept  of  obedience. 
But  this  is  just  w^hat  the  Council  has  not  said.  The  Church  by  the 
Council  imposes  Aye.  The  private  conscience  reserves  to  itself  the 
title  to  say  No.  I  must  confess  that  in  this  apology  there  is  to  me  a 
strong,  undeniable  smack  of  Protestantism.  To  reconcile  Dr.  New- 
man's conclusion  with  the  premises  of  the  Vatican  will  surely  require 
all,  if  not  more  than  all, '  the  vigilance,  acuteness,  and  subtlety  of  the 
Schola  TheologoTum^^ 

The  days  of  such  proceedings,  it  is  stated,  are  gone  by ;  and  I  be- 
lieve that,  in  regard  to  our  country,  they  have  passed  away  beyond  re- 
call. But  that  is  not  the  present  question.  The  present  question  is 
whether  the  right  to  perform  such  acts  has  been  effectually  disavowed. 
With  this  question  I  now  proceed  to  deal. 


VI.  Revived  Claims  of  the  Papal  Chaie. 

1.  The  Deposing  Power. 

2.  The  Use  of  Force. 

It  will  perhaps  have  been  observed  by  others,  as  it  has  been  by  me, 
that  from  the  charges  against  my  account  of  the  Syllabus  are  notably 
absent  tw^o  of  its  most  important  and  instructive  heads.  I  accuse  the 
Syllabus  of  teaching  the  right  of  the  Church  to  use  Force,  and  of  main- 
taining the  Deposing  power. 

When  my  tract  was  published,  I  had  little  idea  of  the  extent  to  which, 
and  (as  to  some  of  them)  the  hardihood  with  which,  those  w^io  should 

*  Dr.  Newman,  p.  121. 


.  EEVIVED  CLAIMS  OF  THE  PAPAL  CHAIR.  51 

have  confuted  my  charges  would  themselves  supply  evidence  to  sustain 
them. 

Bishop  Clifford,  indeed,  sustains  the  deposing  power  on  the  ground 
that  it  was  accorded  to  the  Pope  by  the  nations.  It  was  simply  a  case 
like  that  of  the  Geneva  Arbitrators.^  Dr.  Kewman^  defends  it,  but 
only  upon  conditions.  The  circumstances  must  be  rare  and  critical. 
Tl)^  proceeding  must  be  judicial.  It  must  appeal  to  the  moral  law. 
Lastly,  there  must  be  a  united  consent  of  various  nations.  In  fine, 
Dr.  Newman  accepts  the  deposing  power  only  under  the  conditions 
whi<}h,  as  he  thinks,  the  Pope  himself  lays  down. 

These  allegations  quiet  my  fears ;  but  they  strain  my  faith ;  and,  pur- 
porting to  be  historical,  they  shock  my  judgment.  For  they  are,  to 
speak  plainly,  without  foundation.  The  Arbitrators  at  Geneva  settled 
a  dispute,  which  they  recited  in  formal  terms,  that  the  two  parties  to  it 
had  empowered  and  invited  them  to  settle.  The  point  of  consent  is 
the  only  weighty  one  among  the  four  conditions  of  Dr.  Newman,  and 
is  the  sole  point  raised  by  Bishop  Clifford.  Did,  then,  Paul  III.,  as  ar- 
bitrator in  the  case  of  Henry  YIII.,  pursue  dflike  procedure  ?  The  first 
words  of  his  Bull  are,  '  The  condemnation  and  excommunication  of 
Henry  YIIL,  King  of  England  :'  not  an  auspicious  beginning.  There 
is  nothing  at  all  about  arbitration  or  consent  of  any  body,  but  a  solemn 
and  fierce  recital  of  power  received  from  God,  not  from  the  nations,  or 
from  one  nation,  or  from  any  fraction  of  a  nation ;  power  '  over  the 
nations  and  over  the  kingdoms,  to  pluck  up  and  to  destroy,  to  build  up 
and  to  plant,  as  chief  over  all  kings  of  the  w^hole  earth,  and  all  peoples 
possessing  rule.'  Exactly  similar  is  the  '  arbitration '  of  Pius  Y.  between 
himself  and  Elizabeth  to  the  'arbitration'  of  Paul  III.  between  him- 
self and  Henry  YIII. 

Archbishop  Manning,  indeed,  has  thrown^  in  a  statement,  the  utility 
of  which  it  is  hard  to  understand,  that  Queen  Elizabeth  ^was  baptized 
a  Catholic'  She  was  baptized  after  Appeals  to  Eome  had  been  abol- 
ished, and  two  years  after  the  Clergy  had  owned  in  the  King  that  title 


^  Pastoral  Letter, -p.  12. 

^  Dr.  Newman,  pp.  3G,  37. 

^  Archbishop  Manning,  p.  89.  See  the  Anathemas  of  the  Council  of  Trent  against  those 
who  deny  that  heretics,  as  being  baptized  persons,  are  bound  to  obedience  to  the  Church.  I 
hope  the  Archbishop  has  not  incautiously  incurred  them. 


52  VATICANISM. 

of  Headship  which  Mary  abolished,  and  which  never  has  been  revived. 
But  Archbishop  Manning  knows  quite  well  that  the  Papal  claims  of 
right  extend  to  all  baj)tized  persons  whatever,  and  Queen  Victoria 
could  have  no  exemption  unless  it  could  be  sliown  that  she  was  un- 
baptized. 

The  doctrine  of  the  consent  of  nations  is  a  pure  imagination.  The 
general  truth  of  the  matter  is  that  the  Popes  of  the  Middle  Ages,  like 
some  other  persons  and  professions,  throve  upon  the  discords  of  their 
neighbors.  Other  powers  were  only  somewhere:  the  Pope,  in  the 
West,  was  every  where.  Of  the  two  parties  to  a  qnarrel,  it  was  worth 
the  while  of  each  to  bid  for  the  assistance  of  the  Pope  against  his  en- 
emy ;  and  he  that  bid  the  highest,  not  merely  in  dry  acknowledgment 
of  the  Papal  prerogatives,  but  also  commonly  in  the  solid  tribute  of 
Peter's  pence  or  patronages,  or  other  tangible  advantages,  most  com- 
monly got  the  support  of  the  Pope.  This  is  a  brief  and  rude  outline  ; 
but  it  is  history,  and  the  other  is  fiction. 

But  does  Dr.  Newman  stand  better  at  this  point  ?  He  only  grants 
the  deposing  power  in  the  shape  in  which  the  Pope  asks  it;  and  he 
says  the  Pope  only  asks  it  on  the  conditions  of  which  one  is  '  a  united 
consent  of  various  nations.'^  In  the  Speech  of  the  Pope,  however, 
which  he  cites,  there  is  nothing  corresponding  to  this  account.  The 
Pope  says  distinctly,  ^of  this  right  the  Fountain  is  (not  the  Infallibil- 
ity, but)  the  Pontifical  Authority.'  The  people  of  the  Middle  Ages — 
what  did  they  do  ?  made  him  an  arbitrator  or  judge?  No:  but  recog- 
nized in  him  that  which — what?  he  w^as?  no:  but — Mie  IS;  the  Su- 
preme Judge  of  Christendom.'  The  right  was  not  created,  but  'as- 
sisted, as  was  DUE  to  it,  by  the  public  law  and  common  consent  of 
•  tlie  nations.'  If  this  is  not  enough,  I  will  complete  the  demonstration. 
An  early  report  of  the  Speech'^  from  the  Eoman  newspapers  winds  up 
the  statement  by  describing  the  Deposing  Power  as — 

'A  right  which  the  Popes,  invited  by  the  call  of  the  nations,  had  to  exircise,  when  the  gen- 
eral good  demanded  it. ' 

But  in  tlie  authorized  and  final  report^  given  in  the  Collection  of 
the  Speeches  of  Pius  IX.,  this  passage  is  corrected,  and  runs  thus : 

*  Dr.  Newman,  p.  37. 

'  Tablet,  November  21,  1874,  Letter  of  C.  S.  D. 

"^  Discorsi  di  Pio  J^.  vol.  i.  p.  203. 


REVIVED  CLAIMS  OF  THE  PAPAL  CHAIR.  53 

'A  right  which  the  Popes  exercised  in  virtue  of  their  authority  when  the  general  good  de- 
manded it. '  ^ 

Thus  Bishop  Clifford  and  Dr.  Xewinan  are  entirely  at  issue  with  the 
Pope  respecting  the  deposing  power.  Will  they  not  have  to  reconsider 
what  they  are  to  say,  and  w^hat  they  are  to  believe?  That  power,  it 
must  be  borne  in  mind,  appears  to  have  one  of  the  firmest  possible 
Pontifical  foundations  in  the  Bull  Unam  Sanctam,  which  is  admitted 
on  all  hands  to  be  a  declaration  ex  cathedra. 

But  it  is  not  to  the  more  moderate  views  of  the  Bishop  and  Dr. 
Newman  that  we  are  to  resort  for  information  on  the  ruling  fashions 
of  Roman  doctrine.  Among  the  really  orthodox  defenders  of  Vati- 
canism, who  have  supplied  the  large  majority  of  Peproofs  and  Peplies, 
I  do  not  recollect  to  have  found  one  single  disavowal  of  the  deposing 
power.  Perhaps  the  nearest  approach  to  it  from  any  writer  of  this 
school  is  supplied  by  Monsignor  Capel,  who  remarks  that  the  Pope's  of- 
fice of  arbiter  is  at  an  end,  or  ^  at  least  in  aheyance.^"^  There  are,  in- 
deed, enough  of  disavowals  wholly  valueless.  For  example,  disavowals 
of  the  universal  monarchy ;  by  which  it  appears  to  be  meant  that  the 
Popes  never  claimed,  in  temporals,  such  a  monarchical  power  as  is  now 
accorded  to  them  in  spirituals,  namely,  a  power  absorbing  and  compre- 
hending every  other  power  whatever.  Or,  again,  disavowals  of  the 
directa  jpotestas.  For  one,  I  attach  not  a  f eather  s  weight  to  the  dis- 
tinction between  the  direct  power  and  the  indirect.  Speaking  in  his 
own  person.  Archbishop  Manning  eschews  the  gross  assertions  to  which 
in  another  work  he  has  lent  a  sanction,^  and  seems  to  think  he  has 
mended  the  position  when  he  tells  us  that  the  Church — that  is  to  say 
the  Pope-^'lias  a  supreme  judicial  office,  in  respect  to  the  moral  law, 
over  all  nations  and  over  all  persons,  both  governors  and  governed.' 
As  long  as  they  do  right,  it  is  directive  and  preceptive ;  when  they  do 
wrong,  the  black  cap  of  the  judge  is  put  on,  ratione  peccaii,  'by  rea- 
son of  sin.'  That  is  to  say,  in  plain  words,  the  right  and  the  wrong  in 
the  conduct  of  States  and  of  individuals  is  now,  as  it  always  has  been,  a 

^  Tablet  original  (for  which  I  am  not  responsible) :  '  Un  diritto,  che  i  Papi,  chiarnati  clal 
voto  (lei  popoli,  dovettero  eserciture  quando  il  comun  l)ene  lo  domandava.'  Authorized  orig- 
inal:  'Un  diritto  che  i  Papi  esercitarono  in  virtu  della  loro  Autoritii,  quando  il  comun  bene 
lo  dimandava.' 

=  Dr.  Capel,  p.  60. 

^  Essays,  etc.     Edited  by  Archbishop  Manning.    London. 


54  VATICANISM.     ^ 

matter  for  the  judicial  cognizance  of  tlie  Church;  and  the  entire  judi- 
cial power  of  the  Church  is  summed  up  in  the  Pope  : 

'  If  Christian  princes  and  their  laws  deviate  from  the  law  of  God,  the  Church  has  Authority 
from  God  to  judge  of  that  deviation,  and  by  all  its  powers  to  enforce  the  correction  of  that 
departure  from  justice.'^ 

I  must  accord  to  the  Archbishop  the  praise  of  manliness.  If  we  are 
henceforward  in  any  doubt  as  to  his  opinions,  it  is  by  our  own  fault.  I 
sorrowfully  believe,  moreover,  that  he  does  no  more  than  express  the 
general  opinion  of  the  teachers  who  form  tlie  ruling  body  in  his 
Church  at  large,  and  of  the  present  Anglo-Eomish  clergy  almost  with- 
out exception.  In  the  episcopal  manifesto  of  Bishop  Ullathorne  I  see 
nothing  to  qualify  the  doctrine.  In  the  Pastoral  Letter  of  Bishop 
Yaughan  the  comfort  w^e  obtain  is  this — '  it  will  never,  as  we  believe, 
be  exercised  again ;'  and  Mt  is  a  question  purely  speculative.  It  is  no 
matter  of  Catholic  faith,  and  is  properly  relegated  to  the  schools.'^ 
Bishop  Yaughan  does  not  appear  to  bear  in  mind  that  this  is  exactly 
what  we  were  told,  not  by  his  predecessors  of  1789,  who  denied  Infalli- 
bility outright:  not  by  the  Synod  of  1810,  who  affirmed  it  to  be  im- 
possible that  Infallibility  ever  could  become  an  article  of  faith ;  but 
even  in  the  '  bated  breath '  of  later  times  with  resj^ect  to  Infallibility 
itself,  which,  a  little  while  after,  was  called  back  from  the  schools  and 
the  speculative  region,  and  uplifted  into  the  list  of  the  Christian  cre- 
denda  ;  and  of  which  we  are  now  told  that  it  has  been  believed  always 
and  by  all,  only  its  boundaries  have  been  a  little  better  marked. 

In  the  train  of  the  Bishops  (I  except  Bishop  Clifford)  come  priests, 
monks,  nay,  laymen:  Yaticanism  in  all  its  ranks  and  orders.  And 
among  these  champions  not  one  adopts  the  language  even  of  Bishop 
Doyle,  much  less  of  1810,  much  less  of  1789.  The  'Monk  of  St.  Au- 
gustine's '  is  not  ashamed  to  saj  that  Bishop  Doyle,  who  was  put  for- 
ward in  his  day  as  the  champion  and  representative  man  of  the  body, 
'  held  opinions  openly  at  variance  with  those  of  the  great  mass.'  ^ 

^  Archbishop  Manning,  Vatican  Decrees,  pp.  49-51. 
'  Pastoral  Letter,  pp.  33,  34. 

"  See  The  Month,  Jan.  1875,  pp.  82-84.  Monh  of  St.  Augustine's,  pp.  27  sqq.  Rev.  J. 
Curry's  Disquisition,  pp.  35,  41.     Lord  R.  Montagu,  Expostulation  in  extremis,  p.  51. 


KEVIVED  CLAIMS  OF  THE  PAPAL  CHAIR.  55 

2.  Title  to  the  Use  of  Force. 

Equally  clear,  and  equally  unsatisfactory,  are  the  Ultramontane  dec- 
larations with  respect  to  the  title  of  the  Church  to  employ  force.  Dr. 
Newman  holds  out  a  hand  to  brethren  in  distress  by  showing  that  a 
theological  authority,  who  inclines  to  the  milder  side,  limits  the  kind 
of  force  which  the  Church  has  of  herself  a  right  to  employ.  '  The 
lighter  punishments,  though  temporal  and  corporal,  such  as  shutting 
up  in  a  monastery,  prison,  flogging,  and  others  of  the  same  kind,  short 
of  effusion  of  blood,  the  Chxwoh,  jtcre  suo,  can  inflict.' '  And  again  : 
the  Church  does  not  claim  the  use  of  force  generally,  but  only  that 
use  of  force  which  Professor  !N^uytz  denied. 

We  can  from  this  source  better  understand  the  meaning  of  Arch- 
bishop Manning,  when  he  states^  that  the  Church  has  authority  from 
God  to  correct  departures  from  justice  by  the  use  of  '  all  Its  powers.' 
The  favorite  mode  of  conveying  this  portion  of  truth — a  portion  so 
modest  that  it  loves  not  to  be  seen — is  by  stating  that  the  Church  is 
a  '  perfect  society.'  '-The  Church  is  a  society  complete  and  perfect  in 
and  by  itself,  and  amply  sufl^cing  not  only  to  bring  men  to  salvation 
and  everlasting  bliss,  but  also  to  establish  and  perfectly  regulate  social 
life  among  them.'  ^  The  Church  has  been  created,  says  Bishop  Yaughan, 
a '  perfect  society  or  kingdom,' '  with  full  authority  in  the  triple  order, 
as  needful  for  a  .perfect  kingdom, legislative,  judicial,  and  coercive.'  * 
His  Metropolitan  treats  the  subject  at  some  length  ;  assures  us  that  the 
members  of  his  communion  would  not  make  use  of  force  if  they  were 
able,  but  nowhere  disclaims  the  right.^  Indeed,  he  can  not :  he  dares 
not.  The  inexorable  Syllabus  binds  him  to  maintain  it,  as  Ixion 
was  bound  to  his  wheel. 

The  subject,  however,  is  one  of  the  burning  class ;  and  it  appears  to 
terrify  even  Archbishop  Manning.  He  refers  us  to  the  famous  brief 
or  letter  of  Innocent  HI.,  headed  Novit^  in  his  Appendix,  where  he 
states  that  the  text  is  given  in  fuU.^     In  the  document,  "as  it  is  there 

^  Cardinal  Soglia,  as  cited  by  Dr.  Newman,  pp.  89,  90. 

^  Vatican  Decrees^  p.  43. 

^  Martin,  S.  J.,  De  Matrimonio,  Notiones  Prcevice,  p.  ci. 

*  Pastoral  Letter,  p.  13. 

^  See  Appendix  H. 

^  Archbishop  Manning,  p.  G2,  n. 


56  VATICANISM. 

given,  will  be  found  the  Pope's  assertion  that  it  is  his  part  to  pass 
judgment  on  sovereigns  in  respect  of  sin  (ratione  jpeccati)^  and  that  he 
can  coerce  them  by  ecclesiastical  constraint  {districtionem).  But  the 
text  of  the  l)rief  is,  according  to  my  copy  of  the  Decretals,  not  given  in 
full;  and  the  copyist  has  done  the  Pope  scanty  justice.  He  seems  to 
have  omitted  what  is  the  clearest  and  most  important .  passage  of  the 
whole,  since  it  distinctly  shows  that  what  is  contemplated  is  the  use  of 
force : 

'The  Apostle  also  admonishes  us  to  rebuke  disturbers;  and  elsewhere  he  says,  "reprove, 
intreat,  rebuke  with  all  patience  and  doctrine."  Now  that  we  are  able,  and  also  hound  to  co- 
erce^ is  plain  from  this,  that  the  Lord  says  to  the  Prophet,  who  was  one  of  the  priests  of  An- 
athoth  :  "Behold,  I  have  appointed  thee  over. the  nations  and  the  kings,  that  thou  raayest 
tear  up,  and  pull  down,  and  scatter,  and  build,  and  plant." '^ 

"With  regard  to  Dr.  Newman's  limitation  of  the  Proposition,  I  must 
cite  an  autjiority  certainly  higher  in  the  Papal  sense.  The  Jesuit 
Schrader  has  published,  with  a  Papal  aj^probation  attached,  a  list  of 
the  affirmative  propositions  answering  to  the  negative  condemnations 
of  the  Syllabus.     I  extract  his  Article  24 :  ^ 

'  The  Church  has  the  power  to  apply  external  coercion  (aiisseren  Zwang  anzuwenden) : 
she  has  also  a  temporal  authority  direct  and  indirect.' 

The  remark  is  appended, '  Xot  souls  alone  are  subject  to  her  author- 
ity.' 

All,  then,  that  I  stated  in  the  Expostulation,  on  the  Deposing  Pow- 
er, and  on  the  claims  of  the  Roman  Church  to  employ  force,  is  more 
than  made  good. 

It  was,  I  suppose,  to  put  what  Burnet  would  call  a  face  of  propriety 
on  these  and  such  like  tenets,  that  one  of  the  combatants  opposed  to  me 
in  the  present  controversy  has  revived  an  ingenious  illustration  of  that 
clever  and  able  writer,  the  late  Cardinal  "Wiseman.  He  held  that  cer- 
tain doctrines  present  to  us  an  unseemly  appearance,  because  we  stand 
outside  the  Papal  Church,  even  as  the  most  beautiful  window  of  stained 
glass  in  a  church  offers  to  those  without  only  a  confused  congeries  of 
paint  and  colors,  while  it  is  to  an  eye  viewing  it  from  within  all  glory 

1  Corpus  Juris  Canonici  Decret.  Greg.  IX.,  II.  i.  13.  I  cite  from  Richter's  ed,  (Leipsic, 
1839).  It  has  all  the  pretensions  of  a  critical  and  careful  edition.  I  do  not  however  pre- 
sume to  determine  the  textual  question. 

'  Schrader,  as  above,  p.  G4. 


WARRANT  OF  ALLEGIANCE  ACCORDING  TO  THE  VATICAN.        57 

and  all  beauty.  But  what  does  this  amount  to  ?  It  is  simply  to  say 
that  when  we  look  at  the  object  in  the  ffee  air  and  full  light  of  day 
which  God  has  given  us,  its  structure  is  repulsive  and  its  arrangement 
chaotic ;  but  if  we  will  part  with  a  great  portion  of  that  light  by  pass- 
ing within  the  walls  of  a  building  made  by  the  hand  of  man;  then,  in- 
deed, it  will  be  better  able  to  bear  our  scrutiny.  It  is  an  ill  recom- 
mendation of  a  commodity  to  point  out  that  it  looks  the  best  where 
the  light  is  scantiest. 


YII.  Warrant  of  Allegiance  according  to  the  Vatican. 

1.  Its  Alleged  Superiority. 

2.  Its  Heal  Flaws. 

8.  Alleged  Non-interference  of  the  Popes  for  Tivo  Hundred  Years. 

Not  satisfied  with  claiming  to  give  guarantees  for  allegiance  equal  to 
those  of  their  fellow-citizens,  the  champions  of  the  Vatican  have  boldly 
taken  a  position  in  advance.  They  hold  that  they  are  in  a  condition 
to  offer  better  warranty  than  ours,  and  this  because  they  are  guided  by 
an  infallible  Pope,  instead  of  an  erratic  private  judgment;  and  because 
the  Pope  himself  is  exceedingly  emphatic,  even  in  the  Syllabus,  on  the 
duties  of  subjects  toward  their  rulers.  Finally,  all  this  is  backed  and 
riveted  by  an  appeal  to  conduct.  '  The  life  and  conduct  of  the  Church 
for  eighteen  centuries  are  an  ample  guarantee  for  her  love  of  peace  and 
justice.'^  I  would  rather  not  discuss  this  'ample  guarantee.'  Perhaps 
the  Bishop's  appeal  might  shake  one  who  believed :  I  am  certain  it 
would  not  quiet  one  who  doubted. 

The  inculcation  of  civil  obedience  under  the  sanction  of  religion  is, 
so  far  as  I  am  aware,  the  principle  and  practice  of  all  Christian  com- 
munities. We  must  therefore  look  a  little  farther  into  the  matter  in 
order  to  detect  the  distinctive  character,  in  this  respect,  of  the  Vatican. 

Unquestionably  the  Pope,  and  all  Popes,  are  full  and  emphatic  on 
the  duties  of  subjects  to  rulers;  but  of  what  subjects  to  what  rulers? 
It  is  the  Church  of  England  which  has  ever  been  the  extravagantly 
loyal  Church ;  I  mean  which  has,  in  other  days,  exaggerated  the  doc- 
trine of  civil  obedience,  and  made  it  an  instrument  of  much  political 

*  Bishop  Vaughan,  p.  28. 


58  VATICAIJISM. 

mischief.  Passive  obedience,  non-resistance,  and  divine  right,  with  all 
of  good  or  evil  they  involve,  were  specifically  her  ideas.  In  the  theol- 
ogy now  dominant  in  the  Church  of  Eome — the  theology  which  has  so 
long  had  its  nest  in  the  Eoman  Court — these  ideas  prevail,  but  with  a 
rider  to  them :  obedience  is  to  be  given,  divine  right  is  to  belong,  to 
those  Princes  and  Governments  which  adopt  the  views  of  Eome,  or 
which  promote  her  interests :  to  those  Princes  and  Governments  which 
do  right,  Eome  being  the  measure  of  right.  I  have  no  doubt  that 
many  outside  the  charmed  circle  praise  in  perfect  good  faith  the  supe- 
rior bouquet  and  body  of  the  wine  of  Eoman  Catholic  loyalty.  But 
those  within,  can  they  make  such  assertions?  It  is  hard  to  believe  it. 
The  great  art,  nowhere  else  so  well  understood  or  so  largely  practiced, 
is,  in  these  matters,  to  seem  to  assert  without  asserting.  This  has  been 
well  known  at  least  for  near  five  centuries,  since  the  time  of  Gerson, 
whose  name  for  Vaticanism  is  Adidatio.  Sentiens  autem  Adulaiio  quan- 
doque  nimis  se  cognosci,  studet  quasi  modiciore  sermone  deprcssius  uti,  nt 
credihilior  appareaV  I  must  say  that  if  Yaticanists  have  on  this  occa- 
sion paraded  the  superior  quality  of  the  article  they  vend  as  loyalty, 
they  have  also  supplied  us  with  the  means  of  testing  the  assertion ;  be- 
cause one  and  all  of  them  assert  the  corrective  power  of  the  Pope  over 
Christian  Sovereigns  and  Governments.  I  do  not  dispute  that  their 
commodity  is  good,  in  this  country,  for  every-day  tear  and  wear.  But 
as  to  its  ultimate  groundwork  and  principle,  on  which  in  other  places, 
and  other  circumstances,  it  might  fall  back,  of  this  I  will  now  cite  a 
description  from  one  of  the  very  highest  authorities;  from  an  epistle 
of  a  most  able  and  conspicuous  great  Pontiff,  to  whom  reference  has 
already  been  made,  Nicholas  the  First. 

When  that  Pontiff  was  prosecuting  with  iron  will  the  cause  against 
the  divorce  'of  Lothair  from  Theutberga,  he  was  opposed  by  some 
Bishops  within  the  dominions  of  the  Emperor.  Adventitius,  Bishop 
of  Metz,  pleaded  the  duty  of  obeying  his  sovereign.  Nicholas  in  re- 
ply described  his  view  of  that  matter  in  a  passage  truly  classical,  which 
I  translate  from  the  Latin,  as  it  is  given  in  Baronius : 

'You  allege,  that  you  subject  yourself  to  Kings  and  Princes,  because  the  Apostle  says, 
"Whether  to  the  king,  as  in  authority."  Well  and  good.  Examine,  however,  whether  the 
Kings  and  Princes,  to  whom  you  say  that  you  submit,  are  truly  Kings  and  Princes.     Ex- 

'  De  Potest.  Eccl,  Consideratio  XII. ;  Works,  vol.  ii.  p.  24G.     Ed.  Hague,  1728. 


WARRANT  OF  ALLEGIANCE  ACCORDING  TO  THE  VATICAN.         59 

amine  whether  they  govern  well,  first  themselves,  then  the  people  under  them.  For  if  one  be 
evil  to  himself,  how  shall  he  be  good  to  others  ?  Examine  whether  they  conduct  themselves 
rightly  as  Princes ;  for  otherwise  they  are  rather  to  be  deemed  tyrants,  than  taken  for  Kings, 
and  we  should  resist  them,  and  mount  up  against  them,  rather  than  be  under  them.  Other- 
wise, if  we  submit  to  such,  and  do  not  put  ourselves  over  them,  we  must  of  necessity  encour- 
age them  in  their  vices.  Therefore  be  subject  "to  the  King,  as  in  authority,  in  his  virtues, 
that  is  to  say,  not  his  faults  ;  as  the  Apostle  says,  for  the  sake  of  God,  not  against  God."  '^ 

I  cite  the  passage,  not  to  pass  a  censure  in  the  case,  but  for  its 
straightforward  exposition  of  the  doctrine,  now  openly  and  widely  pre- 
ferred, though  not  so  lucidly  expounded,  by  the  teaching  body  of  the 
Eomish  Church.  Plainly  enough,  in  point  of  right,  the  title  of  the 
temporal  Sovereign  is  valid  or  null  according  to  the  view  which  may 
be  taken  by  the  Pope  of  the  nature  of  his  conduct.  'No  just  Prince,' 
says  Archbishop  Manning,  can  be  deposed  by  any  power  on  earth ;  but 
whether  a  Prince  is  just  or  not,  is  a  matter  for  the  Pope  to  judge  of^ 

We  are  told,  indeed,  that  it  is  not  now  the  custom  for  the  Pope  to 
depose  princes :  not  even  Victor  Emmanuel.^  True :  he  does  no  more 
than  exhort  the  crowds  who  wait  upon  him  in  the  Vatican  to  seek  for 
the  restoration  of  those  Italian  sovereigns  whom  the  people  have  driven 
out  But  no  man  is  entitled  to  take  credit  for  not  doing  that  which  he 
has  no  power  to  do.  And  one  of  the  many  irregularities  in  the  mode 
of  argument  pursued  by  Vaticanism  is,  that  such  credit  is  constantly 
taken  for  not  attempting  the  impossible.  It  is  as  if  Louis  XVI.,  when 
a  prisoner  in  the  Temple,  had  vaunted  his  own  clemency  in  not  put- 
ting the  head  of  Eobespierre  under  the  guillotine. 

But  there  are  other  kinds  of  interference  and  aggression,  just  as  in- 
tolerable in  principle  as  the  exercise,  or  pretended  exercise,  of  the  de- 
posing power.     Have  they  been  given  up?     We  shall  presently  see.* 

2.  Its  Real  Flaws. 
Cooks  and  controversialists  seem  to  have  this  in  common,  that  they 
nicely  appreciate  the  standard  of  knowledge  in  those  whose  appetites 
they  supply.  The  cook  is  tempted  to  send  up  ill -dressed  dishes  to 
masters  who  have  slight  skill  in  or  care  for  cookerj^;  and  the  contro- 
versialist occasionally  shows  his  contempt  for  the  intelligence  of  his 
readers  by  the  quality  of  the  arguments  or  statements  which  he  pre- 
sents for  their  acceptance.     But  this,  if  it  is  to  be  done  with  safety, 

^  Baronius,  A.D.  863,  c.  Ixx.  '  Bishop  Vaughan,  Pastoral,  p.  34. 

"  Archbishop  Manning,  p.  46.  *  Infra. 


60  VATICANISM. 

should  be  done  in  measure ;  and  I  must  protest  that  Vaticanism  really 
went  beyond  all  measure  when  it  was  bold  enough  to  contend  that  its 
claims  in  respect  to  the  civil  power  are  the  same  as  those  which  are 
made  by  the  Christian  communions  generally  of  modern  times.  The 
sole  difference,  we  are  told,  is  that  in  one  case  the  Pope,  in  the  other 
the  individual,  determines  the  instances  when  obedience  is  to  be  re- 
fused ;  and  as  the  Pope  is  much  wiser  than  the  individual,  the  differ- 
ence in  the  Eoman  view  is  all  in  favor  of  the  order  of  civil  society. 

The  reader  will,  I  hope,  pay  close  attention  to  this  portion  of  the 
subject.  The  whole  argument  greatly  depends  upon  it.  Before  repeal- 
ing the  penal  laws,  before  granting  political  equality,  the  statesmen  of 
England  certainly  took  a  very  different  view.  They  thought  the 
Eoman  Catholic,  as  an  individual  citizen,  was  trustworthy.  They  were 
not  afraid  of  relying  even  upon  the  local  Church.  What  they  were 
anxious  to  ascertain,  and  what,  as  far  as  men  can  through  language 
learn  the  thought  and  heart  of  man,  they  did  ascertain,  was  this: 
whether  the  Roman  Catholic  citizen,  and  whether  the  local  Church, 
were  free  to  act,  or  were  subjected  to  an  extraneous  authority.  This 
superior  wisdom  of  the  Pope  of  Rome  was  the  very  thing  of  which 
they  had  had  ample  experience  in  the  Middle  Ages ;  which  our  Princes 
and  Parliaments  long  before  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.  and  the  birth  of 
Anne  Boleyn  had  wrought  hard  to  control,  and  which  the  Bishoi^s  of 
the  sixteenth  century,  including  Tunstal  and  Stokesley,  Gardiner  and 
Bonner,  used  their  best  learning  to  exclude.  Those  who  in  1875  pro- 
pound the  doctrine,  which  no  single  century  of  the  Middle  Ages  would 
have  admitted,  must  indeed  have  a  mean  opinion  of  any  intellects  which 
their  language  could  cajole. 

As  a  rule,  the  real  independence  of  states  and  nations  depends  upon 
the  exclusion  of  foreign  influence  proper  from  their  civil  affairs.  AVher- 
ever  the  spirit  of  freedom,  even  if  ever  so  faintly,  breathes,  it  resents 
and  reacts  against  any  intrusion  of  another  people  or  Power  into  the 
circle  of  its  interior  concerns,  as  alike  dangerous  and  disgraceful.  As 
water  finds  its  level,  so,  in  a  certain  tolerable  manner  the  various  social 
forces  of  a  country,  if  left  to  themselves,  settle  down  into  equilibrium. 
In  the  normal  posture  of  things,  the  State  ought  to  control,  and  can  con- 
trol, its  subjects  sufficiently  for  civil  order  and  peace ;  and  the  normal  is 
also*  the  ordinary  case,  in  this  respect,  through  the  various  countries  of 


WARRANT  OF  ALLEGIANCE  ACCORDING  TO  THE  VATICAN.    61 

the  civilized  world.  But  the  essential  condition  of  this  ability,  on  which 
all  depends,  is  that  the  forces  which  the  State  is  to  govern  shall  be  forces 
Iiaving  their  seat  within  its  own  territorial  limits.  The  power  of  the 
State  is  essentially  a  local  power. 

But  the  Triregno  of  the  Pope,  figured  by  the  Tiara,  touches  heaven, 
earth,  and  the  place  of  the  departed.  We  now  deal  only  with  the  earth- 
ly province.  As  against  the  local  sway  of  the  State,  the  power  of  the 
Pope  is  ubiquitous ;  and  the  whole  of  it  can  be  applied  at  any  point 
within  the  dominions  of  any  State,  although  the  far  larger  part  of  it 
does  not <irise  within  its  borders,  but  constitutes,  in  the  strictest  sense,  a 
foreign  force.  The  very  first  condition  of  State  rule  is  thus  vitally  com- 
promised. 

The  power  with  which  the  State  has  thus  to  deal  is  one  dwelling 
beyond  its  limits,  and  yet  beyond  the  reach  of  its  arm.  All  the  sub- 
jects of  the  State  are  responsible  to  the  State :  they  must  obey,  or  they 
must  take  the  consequences.  '  But  for  the  Pope  there  are  no  conse- 
quences :  he  is  not  responsible. 

But  it  may  be  said,  and  it  is  true,  that  the  State  will  not  be  much  the 
better  for  the  power  it  possesses  of  sending  all  its  subjects  to  prison  for 
disobedience.  And  here  we  come  upon  the  next  disagreeable  distinction 
in  the  case  of  the  Eoman  Church.  She  alone  arrogates  to  herself  the 
right  to.  speak  to  the  State,  not  as  a  subject, but  as  a  superior;  not  as 
pleading  the  right  of  a  conscience  staggered  by  the  fear  of  sin,  but  as  a 
vast  Incorporation,  setting  up  a  rival  law  against  the  State  in  the  State's 
own  domain,  and  claiming  for  it,  with  a  higher  sanction,  the  title  to 
similar  coercive  means  of  enforcement. 

No  doubt,  mere  submission  to  consequences  is,  for  the  State,  an  in- 
adequate compensation  for  the  mischief  of  disobedience.  The  State 
has  duties  which  are  essential  to  its  existence,  and  which  require  active 
instruments.  Passive  resistance,  widely  enough  extended,  would  be- 
come general  anarchy.  With  the  varying  and  uncombined  influences 
of.  individual  judgment  and  conscience  the  State  can  safely  take  its 
chance.  But  here  is  a  Power  that  claims  duthority  to  order  the  mill- 
ions; and  to  rule  the  rulers  of  the  millions,  whenever,  in  its  judgment, 
those  rulers  may  do  wrong. 

The  first  distinction  then  is,  that  the  Pope  is  himself  foreign  and  not 
responsible  to  the  law;  the  second,  that  the  larger. part  of  his  power  is 


62  •  VATICANISM. 

derived  from  foreign  sources ;  the  third,  that  he  claims  to  act,  and  acts, 
not  by  individuals,  but  on  masses;  the  fourth,  that  he  claims  to  teach 
them,  so  often  as  he  pleases,  what  to  do  at  each  point  of  their  contact 
with  the  laws  of  their  country. 

Even  all  this  might  be  borne,  and  might  be  comparatively  harmless 
but  for  that  at  which  I  have  already  glanced.  He  alone  of  all  ecclesi- 
astical powers  presumes  not  only  to  limit  the  domain  of  the  State,  but 
to  meet  the  State  in  its  own  domain.  The  Presbyterian  Church  of  Scot- 
land showed  a  resolution  never  exceeded,  before  the  secession  of  1843, 
in  resisting  the  civil  power ;  but  it  offered  the  resistance  of  submission. 
It  spoke  for  the  body,  and  its  ministers  in  things  concerning  it ;  but  did 
not  presume  to  command  the  private  conscience.  Its  modest  language 
would  be  far  from  filling  the  os  rotundum  of  a  Eoman  Pontiff.  ISTay, 
the  words  of  the  Apostle  do  not  suffice  for  him.  St.  Peter  himself  was 
not  nearly  so  great  as  his  Successor.  He  was  content  with  the  modest 
excuse  of  the  individual:  'We  ought  to  obey  God  rather  than  man.'^ 
Rome  has  improved  upon  St.  Peter :  '  Your  laws  and  ordinances  we  pro- 
scribe and  condemn,  and  declare  them  to  be  absolutely,  both  hereafter 
and  from  the  first,  null,  void,  and  of  no  effect.'  That  is  to  say,  the  Pope 
takes  into  his  own  hand  the  power  which  he  thinks  the  State  to  have 
misused.  Not  merely  does  he  aid  or  direct  the  conscience  of  those  who 
object,  but  he  even  overrules  the  conscience  of  those  who  approve.  Above 
all,  he  pretends  to  annul  the  law  itself 

Such  is  the  fifth  point  of  essential  distinction  between  these  mon- 
strous claims  and  the  modest  though  in  their  proper  place  invincible 
exigencies  of  the  private  conscience.  But  one  void  still  remains  un- 
filled ;  one  plea  not  yet  unmasked.  Shall  it  be  said,  this  is  all  true, 
but  it  is  all  spiritual,  and  therefore  harmless?  An  idle  answer  at  the 
best,  for  the  origin  of  spiritual  power  is  and  ought  to  be  a  real  one,  and 
ought  not  therefore  to  be  used  against  the  civil  order;  but  w^orse  than 
idle,  because  totally  untrue,  inasmuch  as  we  are  now  told  in  the  plain- 
est terms  (negatively  in  the  Syllabus,  affirmatively  in  Schrader's  ap- 
proved conversion  of  it),^  that  the  Church  is  invested  with  a  temporal 
power  direct  and  indirect,  and  has  authority  to  employ  external  coer- 
cion. 

*  Acts  V.  29.  '  Schrader,  as  above,  p.  G4. 


WARRANT  OF  ALLEGIANCE  ACCORDING  TO  THE  VATICAN.    QS 

Am  I  not  right  in  saying  that,after  all  this,  to  teach  the  identity  of 
the  claims  of  Vaticanism  with  those  of  other  forms  of  Christianity  in 
the  great  and  grave  case  of  conscience  against  the  civil  power,  is  simply 
to  manifest  a  too  thinly  veiled  contempt  for  the  understanding  of  the 
British  community,  for  whose  palate  and  digestion  such  diet  has  been 
oifered  ? 

The  exact  state  of  the  case,  as  I  believe,  is  this :  The  right  to  over- 
ride all  the  States  of  the  world  and  to  cancel  their  acts,  within  limits  as- 
signable from  time  to  time  to,  but  not  by  those  States,  and  the  title  to 
do  battle  with  them,  as  soon  as  it  may  be  practicable  and  expedient,  with 
their  own  proper  weapon  and  last  sanction  of  exterior  force,  has  been 
sedulously  brought  more  and  more  into  view  of  late  years.  The  centre 
of  the  operation  has  lain  in  the  Society  of  Jesuits ;  I  am  loath  to  call 
them  by  the  sacred  name,  which  ought  never  to  be  placed  in  the  pain- 
ful associations  of  controversy.  In  1870,  the  fullness  of  time  was  come. 
The  matter  of  the  things  to  be  believed  and  obeyed  had  been  sufficiently 
developed.  But  inasmuch  as  great  masses  of  the  Koman  Catholic  body 
before  that  time  refused  either  to  believe  or  to  obey,  in  that  year  the 
bold  stroke  was  struck,  and  it  was  decided  to  bring  mischievous  ab- 
stractions if  possible  into  the  order  of  still  more  mischievous  realities. 
The  infallible,  that  is  virtually  the  divine  title  to  command,  and  the 
absolute,  that  is  the  unconditional  duty  to  obey,  were  promulgated  to 
an  astonished  world. 

S.  Alleged  Non-interference  of  the  Popes  for  Two  Hundred  Years. 

It  has  been  alleged  on  this  occasion  by  a  British  Peer,  who  I  have  no 
doubt  has  been  cruelly  misinformed,  that  the  Popes  have  not  invaded 
the  province  of  the  civil  power  during  the  last  two  hundred  years. 

I  will  not  travel  over  so  long  a  period,  but  am  content  even  with  the 
last  twenty. 

1.  In  his  Allocution  of  the  22d  of  January,  1855,  Pius  IX.  declared 
to  be  absolutely  null  and  void  all  acts  of  the  Government  of  Piedmont 
which  he  held  to  be  in  prejudice  of  the  rights  of  Eeligion,  the  Church, 
and  the  Eoman  See,  and  particularly  a  law  proposed  for  the  suppres- 
sion of  the  monastic  orders  as  moral  entities,  that  is  to  say  as  civil  cor- 
porations. 

2.  On  the  26th  of  July  in  the  same  year,  Pius  IX.  sent  forth  another 


64  VATICANISM. 

Allocution,  in  which  he  recited  various  acts  of  the  Government  of 
Spain,  including  the  establishment  of  toleration  for  non-Roman  wor- 
ship, and  the  secularization  of  ecclesiastical  property ;  and,  by  his  own 
Apostolical  authority,  he  declared  all  the  laws  hereto  relating  to  be  abro- 
gated, totally  null,  and  of  no  effect,  .^^  ^  '^•p  7y 

8.  On  the  22d  of  June,  1862,  in  another  Allocution,  Pius  IX.  recited 
the  provisions  of  an  Austrian  law  of  the  previous  December,  which  es- 
tablished freedom  of  opinion,  of  the  press,  of  belief,  of  conscience,  of  sci- 
ence, of  education,  and  of  religious  profession,  and  which  regulated  mat- 
rimonial jurisdiction  and  other  matters.  The  whole  of  these  'abomi- 
nable' laws  'have  been  and  shall  be  totally  void,  and  without  all  force 
whatsoever.' 

In  all  these  cases  reference  is  made,  in  general  terms,  to  Concordats, 
of  which  the  Pope  alleges  the  violation ;  but  he  never  bases  his  annul- 
ment of  the  laws  upon  this  allegation.  And  Schrader,  in  his  work  on 
the  Syllabus,  founds  the  cancellation  of  the  Spanish  law,  in  the  matter 
of  toleration,  not  on  the  Concordat,  but  on  the  original  inherent  right 
of  the  Pope  to  enforce  the  77th  Article  of  the  Syllabus,  respecting  the 
exclusive  establishment  of  the  Roman  religion. ^ 

To  provide,  however,  against  all  attempts  to  take  refugu  in  this  spe- 
cialty, I  will  now  give  instances  where  no  question  of  Concordat  enters 
at  all  into  the  case. 

1.  In  an  Allocution  of  July  27, 1855,  when  the  law  for  the  suppres- 
sion of  monastic  orders  and  appropriation  of  their  properties  had  been 
passed  in  the  kingdom  of  Sardinia,  on  the  simple  ground  of  his  Apos- 
tolic authority,  the  Pope  annuls  this  law,  and  all  other  laws  injurious  to 
the  Church,  and  excommunicates  all  who  had  a  hand  in  them. 

2.  In  an  Allocution  of  December  15, 1856,  the  Pope  recites  the  in- 
terruption of  negotiations  for  a  Concordat  with  Mexico,  and  the  various 
acts  of  that  Government  against  religion,  such  as  the  abolition  of  the  ec- 
clesiastical forum^  the  secularization  of  Church  propert}^,  and  the  civil 
permission  to  members  of  monastic  establishments  to  withdraw  from 
them.     All  of  these  laws  are  declared  absolutely  null  and  void. 

3.  On  the  17th  of  September,  1863,  in  an  Encyclical  Letter  the  Pope 
enumerates  like  proceedings  on  the  part  of  the  Government  of  New 

*  Schrader,  p.  80. 


WARRANT  OF  ALLEGIANCE  ACCORDING  TO  THE  VATICAN.         65 

Granada.  Among  th'e  wrongs  committed,  we  find  the  establishment  of 
freedom  of  worship  {cujicsque  catholici  cultus  lihertas  sancita).  These 
and  all  other  acts  against  the  Church,  utterly  unjust  and  impious,  the 
Pope,  by  his  Apostolic  authority,  declares  to  be  wholly  null  and  void 
in  the  future  and  in  the  past.^ 

No  more,  I  hope,  will  be  heard  of  the  allegation  that  for  two  hundred 
years  the  Popes  have  not  attempted  to  interfere  with  the  Civil  Powers 
of  the  world. 

But  if  it  be  requisite  to  carry  proof  a  step  farther,  this  may  readily 
be  done.  In  his  Petri  Pnvikgium,  vol.  iii.  p.  19,  n..  Archbishop  Man- 
ning quotes  the  Bull  In  Coend  Domini  as  if  it  were  still  in  force.  Bishop 
Clifford,  in  his  Pastoral  Letter  (p.  9),  laid  it  down  that  though,  all  hu- 
man actions  were  moral  actions,  there  were  many  of  them  which  be- 
longed to  the  temporal  power,  and  with  which  the  Pope  could  not  in- 
terfere. Among  these  he  mentioned  the  assessment  and  payment  of 
taxes.  But  is  it  not  the  fact  that  this  Bull  excommunicates  '  all  who 
impose  new  taxes,  not  already  provided  for  by  law,  without  the  Pope's 
leave  ?'  and  all  who  impose,  without  the  said  leave,  special  and  express, 
any  taxes,  new  or  old,  upon  clergymen,  churches,  or  monasteries  ?2 

I  may  be  told  that  Archbishop  Manning  is  not  a  safe  authority  in 
these  matters,  that  the  Bull  In  Ooend  Domini  was  withdrawn  after  the 
assembling  of  the  Council,  and  the  constitution  Apostolicce  Sedis^  substi- 
tuted for  it,  in  which  this  reference  to  taxes  is  omitted.  But  if  this  be 
so,^is  it  not  an  astonishing  fact,  with  reference  to  the  spirit  of  Curialism, 
that  down  to  the  year  1870  these  preposterous  claims  of  aggression 
should  have  been  upheld  and  from  time  to  time  proclaimed  ?  Indeed 
the  new  Constitution  itself,  dated  October,  1869,  the  latest  specimen  of 
reform  and  concession,  without  making  any  reservation  whatever  on 
behalf  of  the  laws  of  the  several  countries,  excommunicates  (among 
others) — 


.*  All  these  citations,  down  to  18G5,  will  be  found  in  Recueil  des  Allocutions  Consistoriales, 
etc.  (Paris,  18G5,  Adrien  Leclerc  et  C'*)  ;  see  also  Europdische  Geschichtskalender,  18G8,  p. 
249  ;  Von  Schulte,  Powers  of  the  Roman  Popes,  vol.  iv.  p.  43  ;  Schrader,  as  above,  Heft  ii. 
p.  80  ;  Vering,  Katholisches  Kirchenrecht  (Mainz,  1868),  Band  xx.  pp.  170-1,  N.  F. ; 
Band  xiv. 

"^  O'KeefFe,  Ultramontanism,  pp.  215,  219.     The  reference  is  to  sections  v.,  xviii. 

^  See  Quirinus,  p.  105  ;  and  see  Constit.  Apostolicce  Sedis  in  Friedberg's  Acta  et  Decreta 
Cone.  Vat.  p.  77  (Freiburg,  1871). 

E 


QQ  VATICANISM. 

1.  All  who  imprison  or  prosecute  Qiostiliter  insequentes)  Archbishops 
or  Bishops. 

2.  All  who  directly  or  indirectly  interfere  with  any  ecclesiastical  ju- 
risdiction. 

8.  All  who  lay  hold  upon  or  sequester  goods  of  ecclesiastics  held  in 
right  of  their  churches  or  benefices. 

4.  All  who  impede  or  deter  the  officers  of  the  Holy  Office  of  the  In- 
quisition in  the  execution  of  their  duties. 

5.  All  who  secularize  or  become  owners  of  Church  property  with- 
out the  permission  of  the  Pope. 


yill.  On  the  Intkinsic  Nature  and  Conditions  of  the  Papal 
Infallibility  decreed  in  the  Vatican  Council. 

I  have  now,  I  think,  dealt  sufficiently,  though  at  greater  length  than 
I  could  have  wished,  with  the  two  allegations,  first,  that  the  Decrees  of 
1870  made  no  difference  in  the  liabilities  of  Eoman  Catholics  with  re- 
gard to  their  civil  allegiance;  secondly,  that  the  rules  of  their  Churcli 
allow  them  to  pay  an  allegiance  no  more  divided  than  that  of  other 
citizens,  and  that  the  claims  of  Ultramontanism,  as  against  the  Civil 
Power,  are  the  very  same  with  those  which  are  advanced  by  Christian 
communions  and  persons  generally. 

I  had  an  unfeigned  anxiety  to  avoid  all  discussion  of  the  Decree  of 
Infallibility  on  its  own,  the  religious  ground ;  but  as  matters  have  gone 
so  far,  it  may  perhaps  be  allowed  me  now  to  say  a  few  words  upon  the 
nature  df  the  extraordinary  tenet  which  the  Bishops  of  one  half  the 
Christian  world  have  now  placed  upon  a  level  with  the  Apostles'  Creed. 

The  name  of  Popery,  which  was  formerly  imposed  ad  invidiam  by 
heated  antagonists,  and  justly  resented  by  Koman  Catholics,^  appears 
now  to  be  perhaps  the  only  name  which  describes,  at  once  with  point 
and  with  accuracy,  the  religion  promulgated  from  the  Vatican  in  1870. 
The  change  made  was  immense.  Bishop  Thirlwall,  one  of  the  ablest 
Plnglish  writers  of  our  time,  and  one  imbued  almost  beyond  any  other 
with  what  the  Germans  eulogize  as  the  historic  mind,  said  in  his  Charge 

*  Petri  Privilegium,  part  ii.  pp.  71-91. 


NATURE  AND  CONDITIONS  OF  PAPAI.  INFALLIBILITY.  67 

of  1872,  that  the  promulgation  of  the  new  Dogma,  which  had  occurred 
since  his  last  meeting  with  his  clergy,  was  '  an  event  far  more  important 
than  the  great  change  in  the  balance  of  power  which  we  have  witness- 
ed during  the  same  interval.' ^  The  effect  of  it,  described  with  literal 
rigor,  was  in  the  last  resort  to  place  the  entire  Christian  religion  in  the 
breast  of  the  Pope,  and  to  suspend  it  on  his  will.  This  is  a  startling 
statement ;  but  as  it  invites,  so  will  it  bear,  examination.  I  put  it  forth 
not  as  rhetoric,  sarcasm,  or  invective;  but  as  fact,  made  good  by 
history. 

It  is  obvious  to  reply  that,  if  the  Christian  religion  is  in  the  heart  of 
the  Pope,  so  the  law  of  England  is  in  the  heart  of  the  Legislature.  The 
case  of  the  Pope  and  the  case  of  the  Legislature  are  the  same  in  this : 
that  neither  of  them  are  subject  to  any  limitation  whatever,  except  such 
as  they  shall  themselves  respectively  allow.  Here  the  resemblance  be- 
gins and  ends.  The  nation  is  ruled  by  a  Legislature,  of  which  by  far 
the  most  powerful  branch  is  freely  chosen,  from  time  to  time,  by  the 
community  itself,  by  the  greater  part  of  the  heads  of  families  in  the 
country;  and  all  the  proceedings  of  its  Parliament  are  not  only  carried 
on  in  the  face  of  day,  but  made  known  from  day  to  day,  almost  from 
hour  to  hour,  in  every  town  and  village,  and  almost  in  every  household 
of  the  land.  They  are  governed  by  rules  framed  to  secure  both  ample 
time  for  consideration  and  the  utmost  freedom,  or,  it  may  be,  even  li- 
cense of  debate;  and  all  that  is  said  and  done  is  subjected  to  an  imme- 
diate, sharp,  and  incessant  criticism ;  with  the  assurance  on  the  part  of 
the  critics  that  they  will  have  not  only  favor  from  their  friends,  but 
impunity  from  their .  enemies.  Erase  every  one  of  these  propositions, 
and  replace  it  by  its  contradictory :  you  will  then  have  a  perfect  de- 
scription of  the  present  Government  of  the  Koman  Church.  The  an- 
cient principles  of  popular  election  and  control,  for  which  room  was 
found  in  the  Apostolic  Church  under  its  inspired  teachers,  and  which 
still  subsist  in  the  Christian  East,  have,  by  the  constant  aggressions  of 
Curialism,  been  in  the  main  effaced,  or,  where  not  effaced,  reduced  to 
the  last  stage  of  practical  inanition.  We  see  before  us  the  Pope,  the 
Bishops,  the  priesthood,  and  the  people.  The  priests  are  absolute  over 
the  people ;  the  Bishops  over  both ;  the  Pope  over  all.     Each  inferior 

'  Charge  of  the  Bishop  of  St.  David's,  1872,  p.  2. 


QS  VATICANISM. 

may  appeal  against  his  superior ;  but  he  appeals  to  a  tribunal  which  is 
secret,  which  is  irresponsible,  which  he  has  no  share,  direct  or  indirect, 
in  constituting,  and  no  means,  however  remote,  of  controlling;  and 
which,  during  all  the  long  centuries  of  its  existence,  but  especially  dur- 
ing the  latest  of  them,  has  had  for  its  cardinal  rule  this — that  all  its 
judgments  should  be  given  in  the  sense  most  calculated  to  build  up 
priestly  power  as  against  the  people,  episcopal  power  as  against  the 
priests.  Papal  power  as  against  all  three.  The  mere  utterances  of  the 
central  See  are  laws ;  and  they  override  at  will  all  other  laws ;  and  if 
they  concern  faith  or  morals,  or  the  discipline  of  the  Church,  they  are 
entitled,  from  all  persons  without  exception,  singly  or  collectivel}^,  to 
an  obedience  without  qualification.  Over  these  utterances — in  their 
preparation  as  well  as  after  their  issue  —  no  man  has  lawful  control. 
They  may  be  the  best,  or  the  worst;  the  most  deliberate,  or  the  most 
precipitate ;  as  no  man  can  restrain,  so  no  man  has  knowledge  of,  what 
is  done  or  meditated.  The  prompters  are  unknown  ;  the  consultees  are 
unknown  ;  the  procedure  is  unknown.  Not  that  there  are  not  officers, 
and  rules  ;  but  the  officers  may  at  will  be  overridden  or  superseded ; 
and  the  rules  at  will,  and  without  notice,  altered  pro  re  natd  and  an- 
nulled. To  secure  rights  has  been,  and  is,  the  aim  of  the  Christian  civ- 
ilization ;  to  destroy  them,  and  to  establish  the  resistless,  domineering 
action  of  a  purely  central  power,  is  the  aim  of  the  Eoman  policy.  Too 
much  and  too  long,  in  other  times,  was  this  its  tendency;  but  what  was 
its  besetting  sin  has  now  become,  as  far  as  man  can  make  it,  by  the 
crowning  triumph  of  1870,  its  undisguised,  unchecked  rule  of  action 
and  law  of  life. 

These  words, 'harsh  as  they  may  seem,  and  strange  as  they  must 
sound,  are  not  the  incoherent-imaginings  of  adverse  partisanship.  The 
best  and  greatest  of  the  children  of  the. Eoman  Church  have  seen  occa- 
sion to  use  the  like,  with  cause  less  grave  than  that  which  now  exists, 
and  have  pointed  to  the  lust  of  dominion  as  the  source  of  these  enor- 
mous mischiefs  : 

'Di'  oggimai,  che  la  Chiesa  di  Roma 
Per  confontlere  in  se  due  reggimenti 
Cade  nel  fango,  e  se  brutta,  e  la  soma.'^ 

'  The  Church  of  Rome, 
Mixing  two  governments  that  ill  assort, 

'  Dante,  Purgatorio,  xvi.  127-29. 


NATURE  AND  CONDITIONS  OF  PAPAL  INFALLIBILITY.  69 

Hath  missed  her  footing,  fallen  into  the  mire, 

And  there  herself,  and  burden,  much  defiled.' — Cary. 

Without  doubt  there  is  an  answer  to  all  this.  Publicity,  responsibil- 
ity, restraint,  and  all  the  forms  of  warranty  and  safeguard,  are  wanted 
for  a  human  institution,  but  are  inapplicable  to  a  '  divine  teacher,'  to 
an  inspired  Pontiff,  to  a  'living  Christ.'  The  promises  of  God  are 
sure,  and  fail  not.  His  promise  has  been  given,  and  Peter  in  his  Suc- 
cessor shall  never  fail,  never  go  astray.  He  needs  neither  check  nor 
aid,  as  he  will  find  them  for  himself.  He  is  an  exception  to  all  the 
rules  which  determine  human  action ;  and  his  action  in  this  matter  is 
not  really  human,  but  divine.  Having,  then,  the  divine  gift  of  iner- 
rancy, why  may  he  not  be  invested  with  the  title,  and  assume  the  di- 
vine attribute,  of  omnipotence? 

No  one  can  deny  that  the  answer  is  suf&cient,  if  only  it  be  true. 
But  the  weight  of  such  a  superstructure  requires  a  firm,  broad,  well-as- 
certained foundation.  If  it  can  be  shown  to  exist,  so  far  so  good.  In 
the  due  use  of  the  gift  of  reason  with  which  our  nature  is  endowed,  we 
may  look  for  a  blessing  from  God ;  but  the  abandonment  of  reason  is 
credulity,  and  the  habit  of  credulity  is  presumption. 

Is  there,  then,  such  a  foundation  disclosed  to  us  by  Dr.  Newman^ 
when  he  says  'the  long  history  of  the  contest  for  and  against  the 
Pope's  infallibility  has  been  but  a  growing  insight  through  centuries 
into  the  meaning  of  three  texts.'  First,  'Feed  my  sheep'  (John  xxi. 
15-17) ;  of  which  Archbishop  Kenrick  tells  us  that  the  very  words  are 
disputed,  and  the  meaning  forced.^  Next,  '  Strengthen  thy  brethren  ;' 
which  has  no  reference  whatever  to  doctrine,  but  only,  if  its  force 
extend  beyond  the  immediate  occasion,  to  government;  and,  finally, 
'  Thou  art  Peter,  and  on  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church ;'  when  it  is 
notorious  that  the  large  majority  of  the  early  expositors  declare  the 
rock  to  be  not  the  person  but  the  previous  confession  of  Saint  Peter ; 
and  where  it  is  plain  that,  if  his  person  be  really  meant,  there  is  no  dis- 
tinction of  ex  cathedra  and  not  ex  cathedra^  but  the  entire  proceedings  of 
his  ministry  are  included  without  distinction. 

'  Dr.  Newman,  p.  110. 

*  '  Concio  habendu  at  non  habitu,^  i.  ii,  ;  Friedrich,  Documenta  ad  iUiistrandum,  Cone.  Vat. 
Abth.  vol.  i.  pp.  191, 199.  I  leave  it  to  those  better  entitled  and  better  qualified  to  criticise 
the  purely  arbitrary  construction  attached  to  the  words. 


70  VATICANISM. 

Into  three  texts,  then,  it  seems  the  Church  of  Rome  has  at  length,  in 
the  course  of  centuries,  acquired  this  deep  insight.  In  the  study  of 
these  three  fragments,  how  much  else  has  she  forgotten ;  the  total  igno- 
rance of  St.  Peter  himself  respecting  his  'monarchy;'  the  exercise  of 
the  defining  office  not  by  him  but  by  St.  James  in  the  Council  of  Jeru- 
salem ;  the  world-wide  commission  specially  and  directly  given  to  St. 
Paul ;  the  correction  of  St.  Peter  by  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles ;  the 
independent  action  of  all  the  Apostles;  the  twelve  foundations  of  the 
New  Jerusalem,  '  and  in  them  the  names  of  the  twelve  Apostles  of  the 
Lamb'  (Rev.  xxi.  14).  But  let  us  take  a  wider  ground.  Is  it  not  the 
function  of  the  Church  to  study  iht  Divine  Word  as  a  whole,  and  to 
gather  into  the  foci  of  her  teaching  the  rays  that  proceed  from  all  its 
parts?  Is  not  this  narrow,  sterile,  willful  textualism  the  favorite  resort 
of  sectaries,  the  general  charter  of  all  license  and  self-will  that  lays 
waste  the  garden  of  the  Lord?  Is  it  not  this  that  destroys  the  large- 
ness and  fair  proportions  of  the  Truth,  squeezing  here  and  stretching 
there,  substituting  for  the  reverent  jealousy  of  a  faithful  guardianship 
the  ambitious  aims  of  a  class,  and  gradually  forcing  the  heavenly  pattern 
into  harder  and  still  harder  forms  of  distortion  and  caricature? 

However,  it  must  be  observed  that  the  transcendental  answer  we 
have  been  considering,  which  sets  at  naught  all  the  analogies  of  God's 
Providence  in  the  government  of  the  world,  is  the  only  answer  of  a 
breadth  equal  to  the  case..  Other  replies,  which  have  been  attempted, 
are  perfectly  hollow  and  unreal.  For  instance,  we  are  told  that  the 
Pope  can  not  alter  the  already  defined  doctrines  of  the  Faith.  To  this 
I  reply,  let  him  alter  them  as  he  will,  if  only  he  thinks  fit  to  say  that  he 
does  not  alter  them,  his  followers  are  perfectly  and  absolutely  helpless. 
For  if  they  allege  alteration  and  innovation,  the  very  same  language 
wi}l  be  available  against  them  which  has  been  used  against  the  men 
that  have  had  faith  and  courage  given  them  to  protest  against  alteration 
and  innovation  now.  '  Most  impious  are  you,  in  charging  on  us  that 
which,  as  you  know,  we  can  not  do.  "We  have  not  altered,  we  have 
only  defined.  What  the  Church  believed  implicitly  heretofore,  she  be- 
lieves implicitly  hereafter.  Do  not  appeal  to  reason;  that  is  rational- 
ism. Do  not  appeal  to  Scripture ;  that  is  heresy.  Do  not  appeal  to 
history;  that  is  private  judgment.  Over  all  these  things  I  am  judge, 
not  you.     If  you  tell  me  that  I  require  you  to  affirm  to-day,  under  an- 


NATURE  AND  CONDITIONS  OF  PAPAL  INFALLIBILITY.  71 

athema,  what  yesterday  you  were  allowed  or  encouraged  to  deny,  my 
answer  is  that  in  and  by  me  alone  you  have  any  means  of  knowing 
what  it  is  you  affirm,  or  what  it  is  you  deny.'  This  is  the  strain  which 
is  consistently  held  by  the  bold  trumpeters  of  Vaticanism,  and  which 
has  been  effectual  to  intimidate  the  feeble-minded  and  faint-hearted,  who 
seemed  to  have  formed,  at  the  Council  of  the  Vatican,  so  large  a  propor- 
tion of  its  opponents;  nay,  which  has  convinced  them,  or  has  performed 
in  them  the  inscrutable  process,  be  it  what  it  may,  which  is  the  Koman 
substitute  for  conviction,  that  what  in  the  Council  itself  they  denounced 
as  breach  of  faith,  after  the  Council  they  are  permitted,  nay  bound,  to 
embrace,  nay  to  enforce.  - 

Let  me  now  refer  to  another  of  these  fantastic  replies. 

We  are  told  it  would  be  an  entire  mistake  to  confound  this  Infalli- 
bility of  the  Pope,  in  the  province  assigned  to  it,  with  absolutism : 

*  The  Pope  is  bound  by  the  moral  and  divine  law,  by  the  commandments  of  God,  by  the 
rules  of  the  Gospel,  and  by  every  definition  in  faith  and  morals  that  the  Church  has  ever 
made.  No  man  is  more  bound  by  law  than  the  Pope  ;  a  fact  plainly  known  to  himself,  and 
to  every  bishop  and  priest  in  Christendom.'* 

Every  definition  in  faith  and  morals!  These  are  written  definitions. 
What  are  they  but  another  Scripture?  What  right  of  interpreting  this 
other  Scripture  is  granted  to  the  Church  at  large,  more  than  of  the  real 
and  greater  Scripture?  Here  is  surely  in  its  perfection  the  petition  for 
bread  answered  by  the  gift  of  a  stone. 

Bishop  Vaughan  does  not  venture  to  assert  that  the  Pope  is  bound 
by  the  canon  law,  the  written  law  of  the  Church  of  Eome.  The  aboli- 
tion of  the  French  Sees  under  the  Concordat  with  Napoleon,  and  the 
deposition  of  their  legitimate  Bishops,  even  if  it  were  the  only  instance, 
has  settled  that  question  forever.  Over  the  written  law  of  his  Church 
the  pleasure  of  the  Pope  is  supreme.  And  this  justifies,  for  every  prac- 
tical purpose,  the  assertion  that  law  no  longer  exists  in  that  Church ;  in 
the  same  very  real  sense  as  we  should  say  there  was  no  law  in  England 
in  the  reign  of  James  the  Second,  while  it  was  subject  to  a  dispensing 
power.  There  exists  no  law  wherever  a  living  ruler,  an  executive 
head,  claims  and  exercises,  and  is  allowed  to  possess,  a  power  of  annul- 
ling or  a  power  of  dispensing  with  the  law.     If  Bishop  Vaughan  does 

*  Bishop  Vaughan,  Pastoral  Letter,  p.  30. 


72  VATICANISM. 

not  know  this,  I  am  sorry  to  say  he  does  not  know  the  first  lesson  that 
every  English  citizen  should  learn ;  he  has  yet  to  pass  through  the  lisp- 
ings  of  civil  childhood.  This  exemption  of  the  individual,  be  he  who 
he  may,  from  the  restraints  of  the  law  is  the  very  thing  that  in  England 
we  term  absolutism.  By  absolutism  we  mean  the  superiority  of  a  per- 
sonal will  to  law,  for  the  purpose  of  putting  aside  or  changing  law. 
Now  that  power  is  precisely  what  the  Pope  possesses.  First,  because 
he  is  infallible  in  faith  and  morals  when  he  speaks  ex  cathedra^  and  he 
himself  is  the  final  judge  which  of  his  utterances  shall  be  utterances  ex 
cathedra.  He  has  only  to  use  the  words,  '  I,  ex  cathedra^  declare ;'  or  the 
words,  '  I,  in  the  discharge  of  the  office  of  pastor  and  teacher  of  all 
Christians,  by  virtue  of  my  supreme  Apostolic  authority,  define  as  a 
doctrine  regarding  fixith  or  morals,  to  be  held  by  the  Universal  Church, ' 
and  all  words  that  may  follow,  be  they  what  they  may,  must  now  and 
hereafter  be  as  absolutely  accepted  by  every  Eoman  Catholic  who  takes 
the  Vatican  for  his  teacher,  with  what  in  their  theological  language  they 
call  a  divine  faith,  as  must  any  article  of  the  Apostles'  Creed.  And 
what  words  they  are  to  be  that  may  follow,  the  Pope  by  his  own  will 
and  motion  is  the  sole  judge. 

It  is  futile  to  say  the  Pope  has  the  Jesuits  and  other  admirable  ad- 
visers near  him,  whom  he  will  always  consult.  I  am  bound  to  add  that 
I  am  skeptical  as  to  the  excellence  of  these  advisers.  These  are  the 
men  who  cherish,  methodize,  transmit,  and  exaggerate  all  the  danger- 
ous traditions  of  the  Curia.  In  them  it  lives.  The  ambition  and  self- 
seeking  of  the  Court  of  Rome  have  here  their  root.  They  seem  to  sup- 
ply that  Roman  malaria  which  Dr.  Newman'  tells  us  encircles  the  base 
of  the  rock  of  St.  Peter.  But  the  question  is  not  what  the  Pope  will 
do ;  it  is  what  he  can  do,  what  he  has  power  to  do ;  whether,  in  Bishop 
Yaughan's  language,  he  is  bound  by  law ;  not  whether  he  is  so  wise  and 
so  well-advised  that  it  is  perfectly  safe  to  leave  him  not  bound  by  law. 
On  this  latter  question  there  may  be  a  great  conflict  of  opinions;  but  it 
is  not  the  question  before  us. 

It  can  not  be  pleaded  against  him,  were  it  ever  so  clear,  that  his 
declaration  is  contrary  to  the  declaration  of  some  other  Popes.  For 
here,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Christian  Creed,  he  may  tell  you — always 

*  Vatican  Decrees,  chap.  iii.  .  '  Dr.  Newman,  p.  94. 


NATURE  AND  CONDITIONS  OF  PAPAL  INFALLIBILITY,  73 

speaking  in  the  manner  supposed — that  that  other  Pope  was  not  speak- 
ing ex  cathedrd.  Or  he  may  tell  you  that  there  is  no  contrariety.  If 
you  have  read,  if  you  have  studied,  if  you  have  seen,  if  you  have  hum- 
bly used  every  means  of  getting  to  the  truth,  and  you  return  to  your 
point  that  contrariety  there  is^  again  his  answer  is  ready :  That  assertion 
of  yours  is  simply  your  private  judgment ;  and  your  pjivate  judgment 
is  just  what  my  infallibility  is  meant  and  appointed  to  put  down.  My 
word  is  the  tradition  of  the  Church.  It  is  the  nod  of  Zeus^  it  is  the 
judgment  of  the  Eternal.  There  is  no  escaping  it,  and  no  disguising 
it :  the  whole  Christian  religion,  according  to  the  modern  Church  of 
Eome,  is  in  the  breast  of  one  man.  The  will  and  arbitrament  of  one 
man  will  for  the  future  decide,  through  half  the  Christian  world,  what 
religion  is  to  be.  It  is  unnecessary  to  remind  me  that  this  power  is 
limited  to  faith  and  morals.  We  know  it  is;  it  does  not  extend  to 
geometry,  or  to  numbers.  Equally  is  it  beside  the  point  to  observe  that 
the  infallibility  alleged  has  not  received  a  new  definition :  I  have  no- 
where said  it  had.  It  is  the  old  gift:  it  is  newly  lodged.  Whatever 
was  formerly  ascribed  either  to  the  Pope,  or  to  the  Council,  or  to  the 
entire  governing  body  of  the  Church,  or  to  the  Church  general  and  dif- 
fused, the  final  sense  of  the  great  Christian  community,  aided  by 
authority,  tested  by  discussion,  mellowed  and  ripened  by  time — all — no 
more  than  all,  and  no  less  than  all — of  what  God  gave,  for  guidance, 
through  the  power  of  truth,  by  the  Christian  revelation,  to  the  whole 
redeemed  family,  the  baptized  flock  of  the  Saviour  in  the  world;  all 
this  is  now  locked  in  the  breast  of  one  man,  opened  and  distributed  at 
his  will,  and  liable  to  assume  whatever  form — whether  under  the  name 
of  identity  or  other  name  it  matters  not — he  may  think  fit  to  give  it. 

Idle,  then,  it  is  to  tell  us,  finally,  that  the  Pope  is  bound  'by  the 
moral  and  divine  law,  by  the  commandments  of  God,  by  the  rules  of 
the  Gospel ;'  and  if  more  verbiage  and  repetition  could  be  piled  up,  as 
Ossa  was  set  upon  Olympus,  and  Pelion  upon  Ossa,  to  cover  the  pov- 
erty and  irrelevancy  of  the  idea,  it  would  not  mend  the  matter.  For 
of  these,  one  and  all,  th.e  Pope  himself,  by  himself,  is  the  judge  with- 
out appeal.  If  he  consults,  it  is  by  his  will;  if  he  does  not  consult,  no 
man  can  call  him  to  account.  No  man,  or  assemblage  of  men,  is  one 
whit  the  less  bound  to  hear  and  to  obey.  He  is  the  judge  of  the  moral 
and  divine  law,  of  the  Gospel,  and  of  the  commandments ;  the  supreme 


74  VATICANISM. 

and  only  final  juclge ;  and  he  is  the  judge,  with  no  legislature  to  correct 
his  errors,  with  no  authoritative  rules  to  guide  his  proceedings;  with  no 
power  on  earth  to  question  the  force,  or  intercept  the  efifeet,  of  his  de- 
cisions. 

It  is  indeed  said  by  Dr.  Newman,  and  by  others,  that  this  infallibility 
is  not  inspiration.  On  such  a  statement  I  have  two  remarks  to  make. 
First,  that  we  have  this  assurance  on  the  strength  only  of  his  own 
private  judgment;  secondly,  that  if  bidden  by  the  self-assertion  of  the 
Pope,  he  will  be  required  by  his  principles  to  retract  it,*  and  to 'assert, 
if  occasion  should  arise,  the  contrary ;  thirdly,  that  he  lives  under  a  sys- 
tem of  development,  through  which  somebody's  private  opinion  of  to- 
day may  become  matter  of  faith  for  all  the  to-morrows  of  the  future. 

What  kind  and  class  of  private  opinions  are  they  that  are  most  like- 
ly to  find  favor  with  the  Yatican?  History,  the  history  of  well-nigh 
eighteen  centuries,  supplies  the  answer,  and  supplies  it  with  almost  the 
rigor  of  a  mathematical  formula.  On  every  contested  question,  that 
opinion  finds  ultimate  assent  at  Eome  which  more  exalts  the  power  of 
Rome.  Have  no  Popes  claimed  this  inspiration,  which  Dr.  Newman  so 
reasonably  denies?  Was  it  claimed  by  Clement  XL  for  the  Bull  Uni- 
genitus?  Was  it  claimed  by  Gregory  the  Second  in  a  judgment  in 
which  he  authorized  a  man,  who  had  an  invalid  wife,  to  quit  her  and 
to  marry  another?  Is  it  or  is  it  not  claimed  by  the  present  Pope,  who 
says  he  has  a  higher  title  to  admonish  the  governments  of  Europe  than 
the  Prophet  Nathan  had  to  admonish  David  ?^  Shall  we  be  told  that 
these  are  his  utterances  only  as  a  private  doctor?  But  we  also  learn 
from  Papal  divines,  and  indeed  the  nature  of  the  case  makes  it  evident, 
that  the  non-infallible  declarations  of  the  Pope  are  still  declarations  of 
very  high  authority.  Again,  is  it  not  the  fact  that,  since  1870,  many 
bishops, German,  Italian,  French,  have  ascribed  inspiration  to  the  Pope? 
Opinions  dispersed  here  and  there  were,  in  the  cases  of  the  Immaculate 
Conception,  and  of  the  Absolute  Supremacy  and  the  Infallibility  ex  ca- 
thedra, gathered  up,  declared  to  constitute  a  consensus  of  the  Church, 
and  made  the  groundwork  of  new  Articles  of  Faith.  Why  should  not 
this  be  done  hereafter  in  the  case  of  Papal  inspiration?  If  is  but  a 
mild  onward  step,  in  comparison  with  the  strides  already  made.    Those 

*  Dr.  Newman,  pp.  99, 131.  »  Discorsi  di  Pio  IX.  vol.  i.  p.  366,  on  March  3, 1872. 


NATURE  AND  CONDITIONS  OF  PAPAL  INFALLIBILITY.  75 

who  cried  *  magnificent '  on  the  last  occasion  will  cry  it  again  on  the 
next.  Dr.  Newman  and  the  minimizing  divines  would,  perhaps,  reply, 
'No:  it  is  impossible.'  But  this  was  the  very  assurance  which,  not  a 
single  and  half-recognized  divine,  but  the  whole  synod  of  Irish  prelates 
gave  to  the  British  Government  in  1810,  and  which  the  Council  of  the 
Vatican  has  authoritatively  falsified- 

Now,  let  us  look  a  little  more  closely  at  this  astonishing  gift  of  In- 
fallibility, and  its  almost  equally  astonishing,  because  arbitrary,  limita- 
tions. The  Pope  is  only  infallible  when  he  speaks  ex  cathedra.  The 
gift,  we  are  told,  has  subsisted  for  1800  years.  When  was  the  discrim- 
inating phrase  invented?  Was  it  after  Christendom  had  done  without 
it  for  one  thousand  six  hundred  years  that  this  limiting  formula  of 
such  vital  moment  was  discovered  ?  Do  we  owe  its  currency  and  prom- 
inence— with  so  much  else  of  ill  omen — to  the  Jesuits?  Before  this,  if 
we  had  not  the  name,  had  we  the  thing? 

Dr.  Newman,' indeed,  finds  for  it  a  very  ancient  extraction.  He  says 
the  Jewish  doctors  taught  ex  cathedra^  and  our  Saviour  enjoined  that 
they  should  be  obeyed.  Surely  there  could  not  be  a  more  calamitous, 
illustration.     Observe  the  terms  of  the  incoherent  proposition. 

The  Scribes  and  Pharisees  sit  in  the  cathedra  of  Moses  :  '•all  therefore 
whatsoever  they  bid  you  observe,  that  observe  and  do."  The  Pope  sits 
in  the  cathedra  of  Peter:  not  all  therefore,  but  only  a  very  limited  part 
of  what  he  enjoins,  you  are  to  accept  and  follow.  Only  what  he  says 
under  four  well-defined  conditions.''  Only,  writes  Dr.  Newman,  when 
he  speaks  'in  matters  speculative,'^  and  'bears  upon  the  domain  of 
thought,  not  directly  of  action.'*  Let  us  look  again  to  our  four  condi-. 
tions:  one  of  them  is  that  he  must  address  the  entire  Church.  It  is 
singular,  to  say  no  more,  that  St.  Peter,  in  his  first  Epistle,  which  has  al- 
ways been  unquestioned  Scripture,  does  not  address  the  entire  Church ; 
but  in  his  second,  which  was  for  a  time  much  questioned,  he  does.  It 
is  much  more  singular  that  the  early  ages  are  believed  to  afford  no  ex- 
ample whatever  of  a  Papal  judgment  addressed  to  the  entire  Church. 
So  that  it  is  easy  to  say  that  Honorius  did  not  speak  ex  catliedrd:  for 
no  Pope  spoke  ex  cathedra.  It  is  even  held  by  some  that  there  was  no 
Bull  or  other  declaration  of  a  Pope  corresponding  with  this  condition 

^  St.  Matt,  xxiii.  2.  ""  Newman,  p.  115.  » Ibid.,  p.  127.  *  Ibid.,  p.*  127. 


76  VATICANISM. 

for  one  thousand  three  hundred  years ;  and  that  the  unhappy  series  be- 
gan with  JJnam  Sandam  of  Boniface  VIII.  But  how  is  it  beyond  all 
expression  strange  that  for  one  thousand  three  hundred  years,  or  were 
it  but  for  half  one  thousand  three  hundred  years,  the  Church  performed 
her  high  office,  and  spread  over  the  nations,  without  any  infallible  teach- 
ing whatever  from  the  Pope,  and  then  that  it  should  have  been  reserved 
for  these  later  ages  first  to  bring  into  exercise  a  gift  so  entirely  new, 
without  example  in  its  character,  and  on  the  presence  or  absence  of 
which  depends  a  vital  difference  in  the  conditions  of  Church  life?  . 

The  declarations  of  the  Pope  ex  cathedra  are  to  be  the  sure  guide  and 
main-stay  of  the  Church ;  and  yet  she  has  passed  through  two  thirds  of 
her  existence  without  once  reverting  to  it!  Nor  is  this  all.  For  in 
those  earlier  ages,  the  fourth  century  in  particular,  were  raised  and  set- 
tled those  tremendous  controversies  relating  to  the  Godhead,  the  decis- 
ion of  which  was  the  most  arduous  work  the  Church  has  ever  been 
called  to  perform  in  the  sphere  of  thought.  This  vast  work  she  went 
through  without  the  infallible  utterances  of  the  Poi)e,  nay  at  three  sev- 
eral times  in  opposition  to  Papal  judgments,  now  determined  to  have 
been  heretical.  Are  more  utterances  now  begun  in  order  to  sustain  the 
miserable  argum.ent  for  forcing  his  Temporal  Sovereignty  on  a  people 
whom  nothing  but  the  violence  of  foreign  arms  will  bring  or  keep  be- 
neath it? 

Yet  one  more  point  of  suggestion.  There  are  those  who  think  that 
the  craving  after  an  infallibility  which  is  to  speak  from  human  lips,  in 
chapter  and  verse,  upon  each  question  as  it  arises,  is  not  a  sign  of  the 
strength  and  healthiness  of  faith,  but  of  the  diseased  avidity  of  its  weak- 
ness. Let  it,  however,  be  granted,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  that  it  is 
a  comfort  to  the  infirmity  of  human  nature  thus  to  attain  promptly  to 
clear  and  intelligible  solutions  of  its  doubts,  instead  of  waiting  on  the 
divine  pleasure,  as  those  who  watch  for  the  morning,  to  receive  the 
supplies  required  by  its  intellectual  and  its  moral  trials.  A  recommen- 
dation of  this  kind,  however  little  it  may  endure  the  scrutiny  of  philo- 
sophic reflection,  may  probably  have  a  great  power  over  the  imagina- 
tion and  the  affections  (affectus)  of  mankind.  For  this,  however,  it  is 
surely  required  that  by  the  ordinary  faculties  of  mankind,  rationally 
and  honestly  used,  these  infallible  decisions  should  be  discernible,  and 
that  they  should  stand  severed  from  the  general  mass  of  promiscuous 


NATURE  AND  CONDITIONS  OF  PAPAL  INFALLIBILITY.  77 

and  ambiguous  teaching.  Even  so  it  was  that,  when  Holy  Scripture 
was  appointed  to  be  of  final  and  supreme  authority,  provision  was  also 
made  by  the  wisdom  of  Providence  for  the  early  collection  of  the  New 
Testament  into  a  single  series  of  books,  so  that  even  we  lay  persons  are 
allowed  to  know  so  far  what  is  Scripture  and  what  is  not,  without  hav- 
ing to  resort  to  the  aid  of  the  'scrutinizing  vigilance,  acuteness,  and 
subtlety  of  i\iQ-  Scliola  TheologorumJ^  But  let  not  the  Papal  Christian 
imagine  th^t  he  is  to  have  a  like  advantage  in  easily  understanding 
what  are  the  Papal  Decrees^  which  for  him  form  part  of  the  unerring- 
revelation  of  God.  It  would  even  be  presumptuous  in  him  to  have  an 
opinion  on  the  point.  The  divine  word  of  Scripture  was  invested  with 
a  power  to  feed  and  to  refresh.  '  He  shall  feed  me  in  a  green  pasture ; 
and  lead  me  forth  beside  the  waters  of  comfort.'^  And,  by  the  blessing 
and  mercy  of  God,  straight  and  open  is  the  access  to  them.  In  no  part 
of  the  Church  of  Christ,  except  the  Eoman,  is  it  jealously  obstructed  by 
ecclesiastical  authority ;  and  even  there  the  line  of  the  sacred  precinct  is 
at  least  perfectly  defined.  But  now  we  are  introduced  to  a  new  code, 
dealing  with  the  same  high  subject-matter,  and  possessed  of  the  same 
transcendent  prerogative  of  certain  and  unchanging  truth  ;  but  what  are 
the  chapters  of  that  code  nobody  knows  except  the  Schola  Theologorum. 
Is,  for  example,  the  private  Christian  less  humbly  desirous  to  know 
whether  he  is  or  is  not  to  rely  absolutely  on  the  declarations  of  the  Syl- 
labus as  to  the  many  and  great  matters  which  it  touches  ?  ISTo  one  can 
tell  him.  Bishop  Fessler  (approved  by  the  Pope)  says  so.  He  admits 
that  he  for  one  does  not  know.  It  seems  doubtful  whether  he  thought 
that  the  Pope  himself  knew.  For  instead  of  asking  the  Pope,  he  prom- 
ises that  it  shall  be  made  the  subject  of  long  inquiry  by  the  Schola  Theo- 
logorum. Ce  sera  tout  d'abord  a  la  science  ilieologique  que  s^imposera  le  de- 
voir de  rechercher  les  diverses  raisons  qui  militent  en  faveur  des  diverses  opin- 
ions sur  cette  question.^  But  when  the  inquiry  has  ended,  and  the  result 
has  been  declared,  is  he  much  better  off"?  I  doubt  it.  For  the  decla- 
ration need  not  then  be  a  final  one.  'Instances,'  says  Dr.  Newman, '  fre- 
quently occur  when  it  is  successfully  maintained  by  some  new  writer 

'  Dr.  Newman,  p.  121.  «  Psalm  xxiii.  2. 

^  'Vraie  etfausse  Infaillihilite  des  Papes,'  p.  8.  Angl.  :  'It  will  at  once  become  the  duty 
of  theological  science  to  examine  into  the  various  reasons  which  go  to  support  each  of  the  va- 
rious opinions  on  that  question.' 


78  VATICANISM. 

that  the  Pope's  act  does  not  imply  what  it  has  seemed  to  imply ;  and 
questions  which  seemed  to  be  closed  are  after  a  course  of  years  re-open- 
ed." It  does  not  appear  whether  there  is  any  limit  to  this  'course  of 
years.'  But  whether  there  is  or  is  not,  one  thing  is  clear :  Between 
the  solid  ground,  the  terra  firma  of  Infallibility,  and  the  quaking,  fluctu- 
ating mind  of  the  individual,  which  seeks  to  find  repose  upon  it,  there 
is  an  interval  over  which  he  can  not  cross.  Decrees  ex  cathedra  arc 
infallible ;  but  determinations  what  decrees  are  ex  cathedra  are  fallible ; 
so  that  the  private  person,  after  he  has  with  all  docility  handed  over  his 
mind  and  its  freedom  to  the  Schola  Theologorum^  can  never  certainly 
know,  never  know  with  'divine  faith,'  when  he  is  on  the  rock  of  infalli- 
bility, when  on  the  shifting  quicksands  of  a  merely  human  persuasion. 

Dr.  Newman"  will  perhaps  now  be  able  to  judge  the  reason  which  led 
me  to  say,  '  There  is  no  established  or  accepted  definition  of  the  phrase 
ex  cathedral'  By  a  definition  I  understand  something  calculated  to  bring 
the  true  nature  of  the  thing  defined  nearer  to  the  rational  apprehension 
of  those  who  seek  to  understand  it;  not  a  volume  of  words  in  them- 
selves obscure,  only  pliable  to  the  professional  interest  of  Curialism,  and 
certainly  well  calculated  to  find  further  employment  for  its  leisure,  and 
fresh  means  of  holding  in  dependence  on  its  will  an  unsuspecting  laity. 

But  all  that  has  been  said  is  but  a  slight  sample  of  the  strange  aspects 
and  portentous  results  of  the  newly  discovered  articulus  siantis  autcaden- 
tis  ecclesice. 


Conclusion. 

I  have  now,  at  greater  length  than  I  could  have  wished,  but  I  think 
with  ample  proof, justified  the  following  assertions: 

1.  That  the  position  of  Eoman  Catholics  has  been  altered  by  the  De- 
crees of  the  Vatican  on  Papal  Infallibility,  and  on  obedience  to  the  Pope. 

2.  That  the  extreme  claims  of  the  Middle  Ages  have  been  sanctioned, 
and  have  been  revived  without  the  warrant  or  excuse  which  might  in 
those  ages  have  been  shown  for  them. 

8.  That  the  claims  asserted  by  the  Pope  are  such  as  to  jflace  civil  al- 
legiance at  his  mercy. 

^  Dr.  Newman,  p.  121.  'Ibid.,  p.  107. 


CONCLUSION.  79 

4.  That  the  State  and  people  of  the  United  Kingdom  had  a  right  to 
rely  on  the  assurances  they  had  received  that  Papal  Infallibility  was 
not,  and  could  not  become,  an  article  of  fai^h  in  the  Roman  Church,  and 
that  the  obedience  due  to  the  Pope  was  limited  by  laws  independent  of 
his  will. 

I  need  not  any  more  refer  to  others  of  my  assertions,  more  general,  or 
less  essential  to  the  main  argument. 

The  appeal  of  the  DuMin  Review^  for  union  on  tlie  basis  of  common 
belief  in  resisting  unbelief,  which  ought  to  be  strong,  is  unhappily  very 
weak.  *  Defend,'  says  the  Reviewer,  '  the  ark  of  salvation  precious  to 
us  both,  though  you  have  an  interest  (so  to  speak)  in  only  a  part  of  the 
cargo.'  But  as  the  Reviewer  himself  is  deck-loading  the  vessel  in  such 
a  manner  as  to  threaten  her  foundering,  to  stop  his  very  active  proceed- 
ings is  n(^t  opposed  to,  nay,  is  part  of,  the  duty  of  caring  for  the  safety 
of  the  vessel.  But  weaker  still,  if  possible,  is  the  appeal  which  Arch- 
bishop Manning  has  made  against  my  publication,  as  one  which  endeav- 
ors to  create  religious  divisions  among  his  flock,  and  instigate  them  to 
rise  against  the  authority  of  the  Church.  For  if  the  Church  of  England, 
of  which  I  am  a  member,  is,  as  she  has  never  ceased  to  teach,  the  an- 
cient, lawful,  Catholic  Church  of  this  country,  it  is  rather  Archbishop 
Manning  than  I  that  may  be  charged  with  creating,  for  the  last  twenty 
years  and  more,  religious  divisions  among  our  countrymen,  and  insti- 
gating them  to  rise  against  that  ancient,  lawful,  and  mild  authority. 

There  may  be,  and  probably  are,  great  faults  in  my  manner  of  con- 
ducting this  argument.  But  the  claim  of  Ultramontanism  among  ns 
seems  to  amount  to  this:  that  there  shall  be  no  free,  and  therefore  no 
effectual,^  examination  of  the  Vatican  Decrees,  because  they  are  the 
words  of  a  Father,  and  sacred  therefore  in  the  eyes  of  his  affectionate 
'  children.^  It  is  deliberately  held,  by  grave  and  serious  men,  that  my 
construing  the  Decrees  of  the  Vatican,  not  arbitrarily,  but  with  argu- 
ment and  proof,  in  a  manner  which  makes  them  adverse  to  civil  duty, 
is  an  insult'  and  an  outrage  to  the  Roman  Catholic  body,  which  I 
have  nowhere  charged  with  accepting  them  in  that  sense.  Yet  a  far 
greater  license  has  been  assumed  by  Archbishop  Manning,  who,  with- 
out any  attempt  at  proof  at  all,  suggests,^  if  he  does  not  assert,  that 

'  For  Jan.,  1875.         *  Dublin  Review^  Jan.,  1875,  p.  172.         ^  Archbishop  Manning,  p.  345. 


80  VATICANISM. 

the  allegiance  of  the  masses  of  the  English  people  is  an  inert  conform- 
ity and  a  passive  compliance,  given  really  for  wrath  and  not  for  con- 
science' sake.  This  opinion  is,  in  my  judgment,  most  untrue,  most 
unjust;  but  to  call  even  this  an  insult  would  be  an  act  of  folly,  be- 
tokening, as  I  think,  an  unsound  and  unmanly  habit  of  mind.  Again, 
to  call  the  unseen  councilors  of  the  Pope  myrmidons,  to  speak  of 
'aiders  and  abettors  of  the  Papal  chair,'  to. call  Eome,  'head-quarters,' 
these  and  like  phrases  amount,  according  to  Archbishop  Manning,' 
to  'an  indulgence  of  unchastened  language  rarely  to  be  equaled.'  I 
frankly  own  that  this  is  in  my  eyes  irrational.  Not  that  it  is  agreeable 
to  me  to  employ  even  this  far  from  immoderate  liberty  of  controversial 
language.  I  would  rather  pay  an  unbroken  reverence  to  all  ministers 
of  religion,  and  especially  to  one  who  fills  the  greatest  See  of  Christen- 
dom.  But  I  see  this  great  personage,  under  ill  advice,  ain\ing  heavy 
and,  as  far  as  he  can  make  them  so,  deadly  blows  at  the  freedom  of 
mankind,  and  therein  not  only  at  the  structure  of  society,  but  at  the 
very  constitution  of  our  nature,  and  the  high  designs  of  Providence  for 
trying  and  training  it.  I  can  not  under  the  restraints  of  courtly  phrase 
convey  any  adequate  idea  of  such  tremendous  mischiefs ;  for  in  propor- 
tion as  the  power  is  venerable,  the  abuse  of  it  is  pernicious.  I  am  driven 
to  the  conclusion  that  this  sensitiveness  is  at  the  best  but  morbid.  The 
cause  of  it  may  be,  that  for  the  last  thirty  years,  in  this  country  at  least, 
Ultramontanism  has  been  very  busy  in  making  controversial  war  upon 
other  people,  with  singularly  little  restraint  of  language ;  arid  has  had 
far  too  little  of  the  truth  told  to  itself.  Hence  it  has  lost  the  habit,  al- 
most the  idea,  of  equal  laws  in  discussion.  Of  that  system  as  a  system, 
especially  after  the  further  review  of  it  which  it  has  been  my  duty  to 
make,  I  must  say  that  its  influence  is  adverse  to  freedom  in  the  State, 
the  family,  and  the  individual;  that  when  weak  it  is  too  often  crafty,' 
and  when  strong  tyrannical;  and  that,  though  in  this  country  no  one 
could  fairly  deny  to  its  professors  the  credit  of  doing  what  they  think 
is  for  the  glory  of  God,  they  exhibit  in  a  notable  degree  the  vast  self- 
deluding  forces  which  make  sport  of  our  common  nature.  The  great 
instrument  to  which  they  look  for  the  promotion  of  Christianity  seems 
to  be  an  unmeasured  exaltation  of  the  clerical  class  and  of  its  power,  as 

*  Archbishop  Mtanning.  p.  177. 


CONCLUSION.  81 

against  all  that  is  secular  and  lay,  an  exaltation  not  less  unhealthy  for 
that  order  itself  than  for  society  at  large.  There  are  those  who  think, 
without  being  mere  worshipers  of  Luther,  that  he  saved  the  Church  of 
Rome  by  alarming  it,  when  its  Popes,  Cardinals,  and  Prelates  were  car- 
rying it  'down  a  steep  place  into  the  sea;'  and  it  may  be  that  those 
who,  even  if  too  roughly,  challenge  the  proceedings  of  the  Yatican,  are 
better  promoting  its  interests  than  such  as  court  its  favors,  and  hang 
upon  its  lips. 

I  am  concerned,  however,  to  say  that  in  the  quick  resentment  which 
has  been  directed  against  clearness  and  strength  of  language,  I  seem  to 
perceive  not  simply  a  natural  sensitiveness,  but  a  great  deal  of  contro- 
versial stratagem.  The  purpose  of  my  pamphlet  was  to  show  that  the 
directors  of  the  Roman  Church  had  in  the  Council  of  the  Yatican  com- 
mitted a  gross  offense  against  civil  authority,  and  against  civil  freedom. 
The  aim  of  most  of  those  who  have  professionally  replied  to  me  seems 
to  have  been  at  all  hazards  to  establish  it  in  the  minds  of  their  flocks, 
that  whatever  is  said  against  their  high  clerical  superiors  is  said  against 
them,  although  they  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  Decrees,  or  with  the 
choice  or  appointment  of  the  exalted  persons  who  framed  and  passed 
them.  But  this  proposition,  if  stated  calmly  as  part  of  an  argument, 
will  not  bear  a  moment's  examination.  Consequently,  it  has  been  bold- 
ly held  that  this  drawing  of  distinctions  between  pastors  and  the  flock, 
because  the  one  made  the  Decrees  and  the  other  did  not,  is  an  insult 
and  an  outrage  to  all  alike  ;^  and  by  this  appeal  passion  is  stirred  up  to 
darken  counsel  and  obscure  the  case. 

I  am  aware  that  this  is  no  slight  matter,  and  I  have  acted  under  a 
sense  of  no  trivial  responsibility.  Rarely  in  the  complicated  combina- 
tions of  politics,  when  holding  a  high  place  in  the  councils  of  my  Sov- 
ereign, and  when  error  was  commonly  visited  by  some  form  of  sharp 
and  speedy  retribution,  have  I  felt  that  scene  as  keenly.  At  any  rate, 
I  may  and  must  say  that  all  the  words  of  these  Tracts  were  written  as 
by  one  who  knows  that  he  must  answer  for  them  to  a  Power  higher 
than  that  of  public  opinion. 

If  any  motive  connected  with  religion  helped  to  sway  me,  it  was  not 

*  I  withhold  the  references — they  are  numerous,  although  by  no  means  universal ;  and  hav- 
ing said  so  much  of  the  extreme  doctrines  of  Archbishop  Manning,  I  have  pleasure  in  obsen- 
ing  that  he  does  not  adopt  this  language. 

F 


82  VATICANISM. 

one  of  hostility,  but  the  reverse.  My  hostility,  at  least,  was  the  sen- 
timent which  we  feel  toward  faults  which  mar  the  excellences,  which 
even  destroy  the  hope  and  the  promise  of  those  w^e  are  fain  to  love. 
Attached  to  my  own  religious  communion,  the  Church  of  my  birth  and 
my  country,  I  have  never  loved  it  with  a  merely  sectional  or  insular 
attachment,  but  have  thankfully  regarded  it  as  that  portion  of  the  great 
redeemed  Christian  family  in  which  my  lot  had  been  cast — not  by,  but 
for  me.  In  every  other  portion  of  that  family,  whatever  its  name, 
whatever  its  extent,  whatever  its  perfections,  or  whatever  its  imperfec- 
tions, I  have  sought  to  feel  a  kindly  interest,  varying  in  its  degree  ac- 
cording to  the  likeness  it  seemed  to  bear  to  the  heavenly  pattern,  and 
according  to  the  capacity  it  seemed  to  possess  to  minister  to  the  health 
and  welfare  of  the  whole. 

'  Le  frondi,  onde  s'  imponda  tutto  1'  orto 
Del  Ortolano  Etenio,  am'  io  cotanto 
Quanto  da  Lui  in  lor  di  bene  e  porto." 

'  The  leaves,  wherewith  embowered  is  all  the  garden 
Of  the  Eternal  Gardener,  do  I  love 
As  much  as  He  has  granted  them  of  good.' — Longfellow. 

Whether  they  be  Tyrian  or  Trojan,''  Eastern  or  Western,  Reformed  or 
Unreformed,  I  desire  to  renounce  and  repudiate  all  which  needlessly 
wounds  them,  which  does  them  less  than  justice,  which  overlooks  their 
place  in  the  affections  and  the  care  of  the  Everlasting  Father  of  us  all. 
Common  sense  seems  to  me  to  teach  that  doctrine,  no  less  than  Christi- 
anity. Therefore  I  will  say,  and  I  trust  to  the  spirit  of  Charity  to  in- 
terpret me,  I  have  always  entertained  a  warm  desire  that  the  better  el- 
ements might  prevail  over  the  worse  in  that  great  Latin  communion 
which  we  call  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  which  comprises  one  half,  or 
near  one  half,  of  Christendom:  for  the  Church  which  gave  us  Thomas 
a  Kempis,and  which  produced  the  scholar-like  and  statesman-like  mind 
of  Erasmus,  the  varied  and  attractive  excellences  of  Colet,  and  of  More; 
for  the  Church  of  Pascal  and  Arnauld,  of  Nicole  and  Quesnel ;  for  the 
Church  of  some  now  living  among  ns,  of  whom  none  w^ould  deny  that 
they  are  as  humble,  as  tender,  as  self-renouncing,  and  as  self-abased — in 
a  word,  as  Evangelical  as  the  most '  Evangelical '  of  Protestants  by  pos- 
sibility can  be. 

*  Dante,  Paradiso,  xxvi.  Qi-G.  "  ^En.  x.  108. 


CONCLUSION.  83 

No  impartial  student  of  history  can,  I  think,  fail  to  regard  with  much 
respect  and  some  sympathy  the  body  of  British  Christians  which,  from 
the  middle  period  of  the  reign  of  Elizabeth  down  to  the  earlier  portion 
of  the  present  century,  adhered  with  self-denying  fidelity,  and  with  a 
remarkable  consistency  of  temper  and  belief,  to  the  Latin  communion. 
•I  lament  its  formation,  and  I  can  not  admit  its  title-deeds;  but  justice 
requires  me  to  appreciate  the  high  qualities  which  it  has  exhibited  and 
sadly  prolonged  under  sore  disadvantage.  It  was  small,  and  dispersed 
through  a  mass  far  from  friendly.  It  was  cut  off  from  the  ancient  na- 
tional hierarchy,  and  the  noble  establishments  of  the  national  religion ; 
it  was  severely  smitten  by  the  penal  laws,  and  its  reasonable  aspirations 
for  the  measures  that  would  have  secured  relief  were  mercilessly  thwart-' 
ed  and  stifled  by  those  Popes  whom  they  loved  too  well.  Amid  all 
these  cruel  difficulties,  it  retained  within  itself  these  high  characteristics : 
it  was  moderate;  it  was  brave;  it  was  devout;  it  was  learned;  it  was 
loyal. 

In  discussing,  however  sharply,  the  Vatican  Decrees,  I  have  endeav- 
ored to  keep  faith  ;  and  I  think  that  honor  as  well  as  prudence  required 
me,  when  offering  an  appeal  upon  public  and  civil  grounds,  to  abstain 
not  only  from  assailing,  but  even  from  questioning  in  any  manner  or 
regard,  the  Eoman  Catholic  religion,  such  as  it  stood  before  1870  in  its 
general  theory,  and  such  as  it  actually  lived  and  breathed  in  England 
during  my  own  early  days,  half  a  century  ago. 

It  was  to  those  members  of  such  a  body,  who  still  cherish  its  tra- 
ditions in  consistency  as  well  as  in  good  faith,  that  I  could  alone,  with 
any  hope  of  profit,  address  my  appeal.  Who  are  they  now?  and  how 
many?  Has  what  was  most  noble  in  them  gone  the  way  of  all  flesh, 
together  with  those  clergy  of  1826  in  England  and  Ireland,  who,  as  Dr. 
Newman  tells  us,  had  been  educated  in  Gallican  opinions  ? 

More  than  thirty  years  ago,  I  expressed  to  a  near  friend,  slightly 
younger  than  myself,  and  in  all  gifts  standing  high  even  among  the 
highest  of  his  da}^,  the  deep  alarm  I  had  conceived  at  the  prgbable 
consequences  of  those  secessions  of  educated,  able,  devout,  and  in  some 
instances  most  eminent  men  to  the  Church  of  Eome,  which  had  then 
begun  in  series,  and  which  continued  for  about  ten  years.  I  had  then 
an  apprehension,  which  after-experience  has  confirmed  in  my  mind, 
though  to  some  it  may  appear  a  paradox,  that  nothing  would  operate 


84  VATICANISM. 

SO  powerfully  upon  the  England  of  the  nineteenth  century  as  a  crowd 
of  these  secessions — especially  if  from  Oxford — in  stimulating,  strength- 
ening, and  extending  the  negative  or  destructive  spirit  in  religion.  My 
friend  replied  to  me,  that  at  any  rate  there  would,  if  the  case  occurred, 
be  some  compensation  in  the  powerful  effect  which  any  great  English 
infusion  could  not  fail  to  have  in  softening  the  spirit  and  modifying- 
the  general  attitude  of  the  Church  of  Eome  itself.  The  secessions  con- 
tinue'd,  and  multiplied.  Some  years  later,  the  author  of  this  remark 
himself  plunged  into  the  flood  of  them.  How  strangely  and  how  sadly 
has  his  estimate  of  their  effects  been  falsified?  They  are  now  seen,  and 
felt  as  well  as  seen,  to  have  contributed  everywhere  to  the  progress  and 
to  the  highest  exaggerations  of  Vaticanism,  and  to  have  altered  in  that 
sense  both  profoundly  and  extensively,  and  by  a  process  which  gives  no 
sign  of  having  even  now  reached  its  last  stage,  the  complexion  of  the 
Anglo-Roman  communion. 

It  is  hard  to  recognize  the  traditions  of  such  a  body  in  the  character 
and  action  of  the  Ultramontane  policy,  or  in  its  influence  either  upon 
moderation,  or  upon  learning,  or  upon  loyalty,  or  upon  the  general 
peace. 

I  have  above  hazarded  an  opinion  that  in  this  country  it  may  cause 
inconvenience  ;  and  I  have  had  materials  ready  to  hand  which  would, 
I  think,  have  enabled  me  amply  to  prove  this  assertion.  But  to  enter 
into  these  details  might  inflame  the  dispute,  and  I  do  not  see  that  it 
is  absolutely  necessar}^  My  object  has  been  to  produce,  if  possible,  a 
temper  of  greater  watchfulness;  to  promote  the  early  and  provident 
fear  which,  says  Mr.  Burke,  is  the  mother  of  necessity ;  to  distrust  that 
lazy  way  of  thought  which  acknowledges  no  danger  until  it  thunders 
at  the  doors;  to  warn  my  countrymen  against  the  velvet  paw,  and 
smooth  and  soft  exterior  of  a  system  which  is  dangerous  to  the  founda- 
tions of  civil  order,  and  which  any  one  of  us  may  at  "any  time  encount- 
er in  his  daily  path.  If  I  am  challenged,  I  must  not  refuse  to  say  it 
is  not  Jess  dangerous,  in  its  ultimate  operation  on  the  human  mind,  to 
the  foundations  of  that  Christian  belief,  which  it  loads  with  false  ex- 
crescences, and  strains  even  to  the  bursting. 

In  some  of  the  works  to  which  I  am  now  offering  my  rejoinder  a 
protest  is  raised  against  this  discussion  in  the  name  of  peace.^     I  will 

'  Dr.  Capel,  p.  48;  Archbishop  Manning,  p.  127. 


CONCLUSION.  85 

not  speak  of  the  kind  of  peace  which  the  Roman  Propaganda  has  for 
the  last  thirty  years  been  carrying  through  the  private  homes  of  En; 
gland.  But  I  look  out  into  the  world;  and  I  find  that  now,  and  in 
great  part  since  the  Vatican  Decrees,  the  Cliurch  of  Rome,  through  the 
Court  of  Rome  and  its  Head,  the  Pope,  is  in  direct  feud  with  Portu-. 
gal,  with  Spain,  with  Germany,  with  Switzerland,  with  Austria,'  with 
Russia,  with  Brazil,  and  with  most  of  South  America;  in  short,  with 
the  far  larger  part  of  Christendom.  The  particulars  may  be  found  in, 
nay,  they  almost  fill,  the  Speeches,  Letters,  Allocutions,  of  the  Pope 
himself.  So  notorious  are  the  facts  that,  according  to  Archbishop  Man- 
ning, they  are  due  to  a  conspiracy  of  the  Governments.  He  might  as 
reasonably  say  they  were  due  to  the  Council  of  the  Amphictyons.  Oa 
one  point  I  must  strongly  insist.  In  my  Expostulation,  I  laid  stress 
upon  the  charge  of  an  intention^  on  the  part  of  Yaticanism,  to  pro- 
mote the  restoration  of  the  temporal  sovereignty  of  the  Pope,  on  the 
first  favorable  opportunity,  by  foreign  arms,  and  without  reference  to 
the  wishes  of  those  who  were  once  his  people.  From  Archbishop 
Manning  downward,  not  so  much  as  one  of  those  who  have  answered 
me  from  the  standing-ground  of  Yaticanism  has  disavowed  this  proj- 
ect: many  of  them  have  openly  professed  that  they  adopt  it,  and  glo- 
ry iu  it.  Thus  my  main  practical  accusation  is  admitted;  and  the 
main  motive  which  prompted  me  is  justified.  I  am  afraid  that  the  cry 
for  peace  in  the  quarters  from  which  it  comes  has  been  the  complaint 
of  the  foeman  scaling  the  walls  against  the  sentry  who  gives  the  alarm. 
That  alarm  every  man  is  entitled  to  give,  when  the  very  subject  that 
precipitates  the  discussion  is  the  performance  of  duties  toward  the 
Crown  and  State,  to  which  we  are  all  bound  in  common,  and  in  which 
the  common  interest  is  so  close  that  their  non-performance  by  any  one 
is  an  injury  to  all  the  rest. 

It  may  be  true  that  in  human  things  there  are  great  restraining  and 
equalizing  powers,  which  work  unseen.  It  may  be  true  that  the  men 
of  good  systems  are  worse  than  their  principles,  and  the  men  of  bad  sys- 
tems better  than  their  principles,  but,  speaking  of  systems,  and  not  of 
men,  I  am  convinced  that  the  time  has  come  when  religion  itself  re- 
quires a  vigorous  protest  against  this  kind  of  religionism. 

I  am  not  one  of  those  who  find  or  imagine  a  hopeless  hostility  be- 
tween authority  and  reason ;  or  who  undervalue  the  vital  moment  of 


8G  VATICANISM. 

Christianity  to  mankind.  I  believe  that  religion  to  be  the  determin- 
ing condition  of  oar  well  or  ill  being,  and  its  Church  to  have  been  and 
to  be,  .in  its  several  organisms,  by  far  the  greatest  institution  that  the 
world  has  ever  seen.  The"  poles  on  which  the  dispensation  rests  are 
truth  and  freedom.  Between  this  there  is  a  holy,  a  divine  union ;  and 
he  that  impairs  or  impugns  either  is  alike  the  enemy  of  both.  To 
tear  or  to  beguile  away  from  man  the  attribute  of  inward  liberty,- is 
not  only  idle,  I  would  almost  say  it  is  impious.  When  the  Christian 
scheme  first  went  forth,  with  all  its  authority,  to  regenerate  the  world, 
it  did  not  discourage,  but  invited,  the  free  action  of  the  human  reason 
and  the  individual  conscience,  while  it  supplied  these  agents  from  with- 
in with  the  rules  and  motives  of  a  humble,  wdiich  was  also  a  noble,  self- 
restraint.  The  propagation  of  the  Gospel  was  committed  to  an  organ- 
ized society;  but  in  the  constitution  of  that  society,  as  we  learn  alike 
from  Scripture  and  from  history,  the  rights  of  all  its  orders  were  well 
distributed  and  guaranteed.  Of  these  early  provisions  for  a  balance 
of  Church  power,  and  for  securing  the  laity  against  sacerdotal  domina- 
tion, the  rigid  conservatism  of  the  Eastern  Church  presents  us,  even 
down  to  the  present  day,  with  an  authentic  and  living  record.  But  in 
tlie  Churches  subject  to  the  Pope,  clerical  power,  and  every  doctrine 
and  usage  favorable  to  clerical  power,  have  been  developed,  and  devel- 
oped, and  developed,  while  all  that  nurtured  freedom,  and  all  that  guar- 
anteed it,  have  been  harassed  and  denounced,  cabined  and  confined, 
attenuated  and  starved,  with  fits  and  starts  of  intermitted  success  and 
failure,  but  with  a  progress  on  the  whole  as  decisively  onward  toward 
its  aim  as  that  which  some  enthusiasts  think  they  see  in  the  natural 
movement  of  humanity  at  large.  At  last  came  the  crowning  stroke 
of  1870:  the  legal  extinction  of  Eight,  and  the  enthronement*  of  Will 
in  its  place,  throughout  the  churches  of  one  half  of  Christendom. 
While  freedom  and  its  guarantees  are  thus  attacked  on  one  side,  a 
multitude  of  busy  but  undisciplined  and  incoherent  assailants,  on  the 
other,  are  making  war,  some  upon  Revelation,  some  upon  dogma,  some 
upon  Theism  itself.  Far  be  it  from  me  to  question  the  integrity  of 
either  party.  But  as  freedom  can  never  be  effectually  established  by 
the  adversaries  of  that  Gospel  which  has  first  made  it  a  reality  for  all 
orders  and  degrees  of  men,  so  the  Gospel  never  can  be  effectually  de- 
fended by  a  policy  which  decline^s  to  acknowledge  the  high  place  as- 


CONCLUSION.  -87 

signed  to  Liberty  in  the  counsels  of  Providence,  and  which,  upon  the 
pretext  of  the  abuse  that  like  every  other  good  she  suffers,  expels  her 
from  its  system.  Among  the  many  noble  thoughts  of  Homer,  there  is 
not  one  more  noble  or  more  penetrating  than  his  judgment  upon  slav- 
ery.    '  On  the  day,'  he  says,  '  that  makes  a  bondman  of  the  free,' 

*  Wide-seeing  Zeus  takes  half  the  man  away.' 

He  thus  judges,  not  because  the  slavery  of  his  time  was  cruel,  for  evi- 
dently it  was  not,  but  because  it  wns  slavery.  What  he  said  against 
servitude  in  the  social  order  we  may  plead  against  Vaticanism  in  the 
spiritual  sphere;  and  no  cloud  of  incense,  which  zeal,  or  flattery,  or 
even  love,  can  raise,  should  hide  the  disastrous  truth  from  the  vision  of 
mankind. 


\  3  ^A^y" 

rxvERsmr 
APPENDICES. 


APPENDIX  A  (p.  5). 

The  following  are  the  principal  Replies  from  antagonists  which  I  have 
seen.  I  have  read  the  whole  of  them  with  care ;  and  I  have  not  know- 
ingly omitted  in  this  Rejoinder  any  thing  material  to  the  main  argu- 
ments that  they  contain.  I  place  them  as  nearly  as  I  can  in  chronolog- 
ical order : 

1.  Reply  to  Mr.  Gladstone.      By  a  Monk  of  St.  Augustine's,  Ramsgate. 

Nov.  15,1874.     London. 

2.  Expostulation  in  extremis.    By  Lord  Robert  Montagu*.    London,  1874. 

3.  The  Dbllingerites^  Mr.  Gladstone.,  and  the  Apostates  from  the  Faith. 

By  Bishop  Ullathorne.     Nov.  17, 1874.     London. 

4.  The  Abomination  of  Desolation.     By  Rev.  J.  Coleridge,  S.J.     Nov. 

23,  1874.     London. 

5.  Very  Rev.  Canon  Oakeley,  Letters   of      Nov.  16  and  27,  1874.     In 

the  Times. 
Q.  Catholic  Allegiance.     By  Bishop  Clifford.     Clifton,  Nov.  25, 1874. 
1.  Pastoral  Letters.     By  Bishop  Yaughan.    Dec.  3, 1874.     London.     The 

same,  with  Appendices,  Jan.  1875. 

8.  Review  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  Expostulation,  in  The  Month  for  Dec.  1874 

and  Jan.  1875.     By  Rev.  T.  B.  Parkinson,  S,  J. 

9.  External  Aspects  of  the  Gladstone  Controversy.      In  T'he  Month  of 

Jan.  1875. 

10.  All  Ultramontane' s  Reply  to  Mr.  Gladstone's  Expostulation.     Lon- 

don, 1874. 

11.  Letter  to  J.  D.  Hutchinson,  Esq.      By  Mr.  J.  Stone  Smith.      Nov.  29, 

1874.     In  the  Halifax  Courier  of  Dec.  5,  1874. 

12.  Letter  to  the  Right  Hon.  W.  E.  Gladstone,  M.P.     By  a  Scottish  Cath- 

olic Layman.     London,  1874. 

1 3.  Reply  to  the  Right  Ho7i.  W.  E  Gladstone's  Political  Expostulation. 

By  MoHsignor  Capel.     London,  1874. 

14.  ^  Vindication  of  the  Pope  and  the  Catholic  Religion.     By  Mulhallen 

Marum,  LL.B.     Kilkenny,  1 874. 


90  APPENDICES. 

15.  C atkolicity^  Liberty^  Allegiance^  a  Didqidsition  on  Mr,  Gladstone's  Ex- 

postulation.     By  Rev.  John  Curry,  Jan.  1, 1875.      London,  Dublin, 
Bradford. 

16.  Mr.  Gladstone^  Expostidation   Unraveled.      By  Bishop  Ullathorne. 

London,  1875. 

17.  Hul  Tentativo  Anticattolico  in  Inghilterra,,  eV  Opuscolo  del  On""'"  Sig. 

Gladstone.     Di  Monsignor  Francesco  Nardi.     Roma,  1875. 

18.  ^  Letter  to  his  Grace  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  on  occasion  of  Mr.  Glad- 

stone's recent  Expostulation.      By  John  Henry  Newman,  D.D.,  of 
the  Oratory.     London,  1875. 

1 9.  The  Vatican  Decrees  in  their  hearing  on  Civil  Allegiance.     By  Henry 

Edward,  Archbishop  of  Westminster.     London,  1875. 

20.  The  Duhlin  Bevieio,  Art.  VH.     London,  Jan.  1875. 

21.  The  Union  Hevieic,  Art.  L      By  Mr.  A.  P.  de  Lisle.      London,  Feb. 

1875. 

I  need  not  here  refer  particularly  to  the  significant  letters  of  favorable 
response  wiiich  have  proceeded  from  within  the  Roman  Catholic  com- 
munion, or  from  those  who  have  been  driven  out  of  it  by  the  Vatican 
Decrees. 


APPENDIX  B  (p.  8). 

*I  lament  not  only  to  read  the  name,  but  to  trace  the  arguments  of  Dr. 
Von  Dollinger  in  the  pamphlet  before  me.' — Archhisho})  Manning,  Letter 
to  the  ''Times^  Nov.  7, 1874. — '  Vatican  Decrees,'*  p.  4. 

Justice  to  Dr.  Von  Dollinger  requires  me  to  state  that  he  had  no  con- 
cern, direct  or  indirect,  in  the  production  or  the  publication  of  the  tract, 
and  that  he  w^as,  until  it  had  gone  to  press,  ignorant  of  its  existence. 
Had  he  been  a  party  to  it,  it  could  not  have  failed  to  be  far  more  worthy 
of  the  attention  it  received. 

Bishop  Ullathorne  goes  further,  and  says  of  Dr.  Von  Dollinger  that  '  he 
never  was  a  theologian.' — Letter,  p.  10. 

Then  they  have  made  strange  mistakes  in  Germany. 

Werner,  a  writer  who  I  believe  is  trustworthy,  in  liis  Geschichte  der 
Katholische7i  Theologie,  1866,  is  led  by  his  subject  to  survey  the  actual 
staff  and  condition  of  the  Roman  Church.  He  says,  p.  470:  'Almost  for 
an  entire  generation.  Dr.  J.  Von  Dollinger  lias  been  held  the  most  learned 
theologian  of  Catholic  Germany ;  and  he  indisputably  counts  among  the 
greatest  intellectual  lights  that  the  Catholic  Church  of  the  present  age 
has  to  show.' 


APPENDICES.  91 

I  cite  a  still  higher  authority  in  Cardinal  Schwarzenberg,  Archbishop 
of  Prague.  On  May  25, 1868,  he  addressed  a  letter  to  Cardinal  Antonelli, 
in  which  he  pointed  out  that  the  theologians,  who  had  been  summoned 
from  Germany  to  the  Council,  were  all  of  the  same  theological  school,  and 
that  for  the  treatment  of.dogmatic  matters  it  was  most  important  that 
some  more  profound  students,  of  more  rich  and  universal  learning,  as  well 
as  sound  in  faith,  should  be  called.  He  goes  on  to  suggest  the  names  of 
Hefele,  Kuhn,  and  (with  a  high  eulogy)  Von  Dollinger. 

The  strangest  of  all  is  yet  behind.  Cardinal  Antonelli,  in  his  reply 
dated  July  15,  receives  with  some  favor  the  suggestion  of  Cardinal 
Schwarzenberg,  and  says  that  one  of  the  three  theologians  named  would 
certainly  have  been  invited  to  the  Council,  had  not  the  Pope  been  informed 
that  if  invited  he  would  decline  to  come.   That  one  was  Dr.  Von  Dollinger. 

I  cite  the  original  documents,  which  will  be  found  in  Friedrich's  Docu- 
menta  ad  illusti'midmn  Concilmm  Yaticmium^  pp.  277-80. 


APPENDIX  C  (p.  20). 

As  I  have  cited  Schrader  elsewhere,  I  cite  him  here  also;  simply  be- 
cause he  translates  (into  German)  upon  a  different  construction  of  the 
Seventy-third  Article  of  the  Syllabus  from  that  which  I  had  adopted,  and 
makes  a  disjunctive  proposition  out  of  two  statements  which  appear  to  be 
in  effect  identical.  In  English,  his  conversion  of  the  article  runs  as  fol- 
lows : 

*Among  Christians  no  true  matrimony  can  be  constituted  by  virtue  of 
a  civil  contract ;  and  it  is  true  that  either  the  marriage  contract  between 
Christians  is  a  Sacrament,  or  that  the  contract  is  null  when  the  Sacrament 
is  excluded. 

*  Remark.  And,  on  this  very  account,  is  everj^  contract  entered  into  be- 
tween man  and  woman,  among  Christians,  without  the  Sacrament,  in  vir- 
tue of  any  civil  law  whatever,  nothing  else  than  a  shameful  and  pernicious 
concubinage,  so  strongly  condemned  by  the  Church ;  and  therefore  tlie 
marriage-bond  can  never  be  separated  from  the  Sacrament." 

The  sum  of  the  matter  seems  to  be  this.  Wherever  it  has  pleased  the 
Pope  to  proclaim  the  Tridentine  Decrees,  civil  marriage  is  concubinage. 
It  is  the  duty  of  each  concubinary  (or  party  to  concubinage),  witli  or 

'  Sfhrnder,  Heft  ii.  p.  79  (Wien,  1865). 


92  APPENDICES. 

without  the  consent  of  the  other  party,  to  quit  that  guilty  state.  And  as 
no  law  of  Church  or  State  binds  a  concubinary  to  marriage  with  the  other 
concubinary,  he  (or  slie)  is  free,  so  far  as  the  Church  of  Rome  can  create 
the  freedom,  to  marry  another  person. 


APPENDIX  D  (p.  37). 


I  do  not  think  myself  called  upon  to  reply  to  the  statements  which  Bish- 
op Vaughan  has  sought  {Pastoral  Letter^  pp.  35-37)  to  show,  that  the  fear 
of  civil  war  ultimately  turned  the  scale  in  the  minds  of  the  chief  Minis- 
ters of  1829,  and  led  them  to  propose  the  Bill  for  Emancipation.  First, 
because  the  question  is  not  what  influences  acted  at  that  moment  on  those 
particular  minds,  but  how  that  equilibrium  of  moral  forces  in  the  country 
h^d  been  brought  about  which  made  civil  war,  or  something  that  might 
be  called  civil  war,  a  possibility.  Secondly,  because  I  am  content  with 
the  reply  provided  in  thQ  Concio  of  Archbishop  Kenrick,  c.  viii.  See  Fried- 
rich's  -Documenta  ad  illustratidum  Concilium  Vaticanum^  vol.  i.  p.  219. 
The  statements  would,  in  truth,  only  be  relevant  if  they  were  weant  to 
show  that  the  Roman  Catholics  of  that  day  were  justified  in  making  false 
statements  of  their  belief  in  order  to  obtain  civil  equality,  but  that,  as 
those  statements  did  not  avail  to  conciliate  the  Ministers  of  1829,  they 
then  materially  fell  back  upon  the  true  ones. 

To  show,  however,  how  long  a  time  had  to  pass  before  the  poison  could 
obtain  possession  of  the  body,  I  point,  without  comment,  to  the  subjoined 
statement,  anonymous,  but,  so  far  as  I  know,  uncontradicted,  and  given 
with  minute  particulars,  which  would  have  made  the  exposure  of  false- 
hood perfectly  easy.  It  is  taken  from  the  Cornish  Telegraph  of  Decem- 
ber 9, 1874,  and  is  signed  Clericus.  It  follows  a  corresponding  statement 
with  regard  to  America,  which  is  completely  corroborated  by  Archbishop 
Kenrick  in  his  Concio:  see  Friedrich's  Documenta,  vol.  i.  p.  215. 

*  Of  a  painful  alteration  in  another  popular  work,  Keenan's  Controver- 
sial Catechism  (London,  Catholic  Publishing  and  Book-selling  Company, 
53  New  Bond  Street),  I  can  speak  from  two  gravely  differing  copies,  botli 
professedly  of  the  same  edition,  now  lying  befove  me.  This  is  so  singu- 
lar a  case  that  I  venture  to  give  it  in  a  little  detail.  Keenan's  Cate- 
chism has  been  very  extensively  used  in  Great  Britain  and  America.  In 
his  preface  to  the  third  edition,  the  author  speaks  of  it  as  "having  the 
high  approbation  of  Archbishop  Hughes,  the  Right  Rev.  Drs.  Kyle  and 


APPENDICES.  0^ 

CaiTuthers ;  as  well  as  the  approval  of  the  Right  Rev.  Dr.  Gillis,  and  the 
Right  Rev.  Dr.  Murdoch."  These  last-named  four  ecclesiastics  were  vic- 
ars-apostolic of  their  respective  districts  in  Scotland,  and  their  separate 
episcopal  approbations  are  prefixed  to  the  Catechism;  those  of  Bishops 
Carruthers  and  Kyle  are  dated,  respectively,  10th  and  15th  of  April,  1846  ; 
those  of  Bishops  Gillis  and  Murdoch,  14th  and  19th  of  November,  1853. 

*  Thus  this  work  was  authenticated  by  a  well-known  American  arch- 
bishop and  four  British  bishops  thoroughly  familiar  with  the  teaching  of 
their  Church,  long  before  Archbishop  Manning  joined  it.  Now,  at  page 
112  of  one  of  my  copies  of  the  "new  edition,  corrected  by  the  author, 
twenty-fourth  thousand,"  are  the  following  question  and  answer : 

Q. — *  "Must  not  Catholics  believe  the  Pope  in  himself  to  be  infallible?" 
A. — ' "  This  is  a  Protestant  invention ;  it  is  no  article  of  the  Catholic 
faith ;  no  decision  of  his  can  oblige,  under  pain  of  heresy,  unless  it  be  re- 
ceived and  enforced  by  the  teaching  body — that  is,  by  the  bishops  of  the 
Church." 

*  It  would  be  satisfactory  if  Archbishop  Manning  w^ould  explain  how 
his  statement  to  Mr.  Bennett  squares  with  this  statement  of  Keenan's, 
and  with  that  of  the  50  7t6as(9?i5. 

'  But,  further,  it  would  be  highly  satisfactory  if  Archbishop  Manning,  or 
some  representative  of  the  "Catholic  Publishing  and  Book-selling  Compa- 
ny" would  explain  how  it  came  to  pass  that,  on  the  passing  of  the  Vati- 
can decree,  apparently  while  this  very  edition  of  Keenan's  Catechism  was 
passing  through  the  press,  the  above  crucial  question  and  answer  were 
quietly  dropped  out,  though  no  intimation  whatsoever  was  given  that 
this  vital  alteration  was  made  in  the  remainder  of  the  edition.  Had  a 
note  been  appended,  intimating  that  this  change  had  become  needful,  no 
objection,  of  course,  could  have  been  made.  But  no  word  has  been  in- 
serted to  announce  or  explain  this  omission  of  so  material  a  passage ; 
while  the  utmost  pains  have  been  taken,  and,  I  must  add,  Avith  great  suc- 
cess, to  pass  oif  this  gravely  altered  book  as  being  identical  with  the  rest 
of  the  edition.  The  title-pages  of  both  copies  alike  profess  that  it  is  the 
"  new  edition,  corrected  by  the  author"  (who  was  in  his  grave  before  the 
Vatican  Council  was  dreamed  of) ;  both  profess  to  be  of  the  "  twenty- 
fourth  thousand ;"  both  have  the  same  episcopal  approbations  and  pref- 
aces; both  are  paged  alike  throughout;  so  that, from  title-page  to  index, 
both  copies  are,  apparently,  identical.  I  have  very  often  placed  both  in 
the  hands  of  friends,  and  asked  if  they  could  detect  any  difference,  but 
have  always  found  they   did  not.      The  Roman  Catholic  book-sellers, 


94  APPENDICES. 

Messrs.  Kelly  and  Messrs.  Gill,  in  Dublin,  from  whom  I  purchased  a  num- 
ber of  copies  in  August,  1871,  were  equally  unaware  of  this  change ;  both 
believed  that  the  Publishing  Company  had  supplied  them  with  the  same 
boot,  and  both  expressed  strongly  their  surprise  at  finding  the  change 
made  without  notice.  Another  Dublin  Roman  Catholic  book-seller  was 
very  indignant  at  this  imposition,  and  strongly  urged  me  to  expose  it. 
It  is  no  accidental  slip  of  the  press ;  for  while  all  the  earliest  copies  of 
the  edition  I  bought  from  Messrs.  Kelly  contained  the  question  and  an- 
swer, they  were  omitted  in  all  the  later  copies  of  Messrs.  Gill's  supply. 
The  omission  is  very  neatly,  cleverly  made  by  a  slight  widening  of  the 
spaces  between  the  questions  and  answers  on  page  112  and  the  beginning 
of  page  113  ;  so  skillfully  managed  that  nobody  would  be  at  all  likely  to 
notice  the  difference  in  these  pages  of  the  two  copies,  unless  he  carefully 
looked,  as  I  did,  for  the  express  purpose  of  seeing  if  both  alike  contained 
this  question  and  answer.' 


APPENDIX  E  (p.  37). 

Extract  from  ^  The  Catholic  Question  f  addressed  to  the  Freeholders  of  the 
County  of  York  on  the  General  Election  o/'1826,  p.  31. 

*  The  Catholic  religion  has  three  great  {eras ;  first  in  its  commencement 
to  the  Dark  Ages ;  then  from  the  middle  centuries  down  to  the  Reforma- 
tion ;  and  lastly,  from  the  Reformation  to  the  present  day.  The  Popish 
religion  of  the  present  day  has  scarcely  any  resemblance  with  its  middle 
stage;  its  powers,  its  pretensions,  its  doctrines,  its  wealth,  and  its  object 
are  not  the  same ;  it  is  a  phantom,  both  in  theory  and  practice,  to  what  it 
once  was ;  and  yet  the  bigots  draw  all  their  arguments  from  the  Middle 
Ages,  and,  passing  all  the  manifest  alterations  of  modern  times,  set  up  a 
cry  about  the  enormities  of  times  long  past,  and  which  have  been  dead 
and  buried  these  three  hundred  years.  This  unjust  conduct  is  just  the 
same  as  if  you  were  to  hang  a  faithful,  tried  domestic,  who  had  served 
you  forty  years,  because  he  had  committed  some  petty  theft  when  he  was 
a  boy.  It  is  the  most  illiberal  and  the  most  unjustifiable  mode  of  argu- 
ing, and  if  applied  to  the  Church  of  England,  would  reduce  it  to  a  worse 
case  than  that  of  her  old  rival.' 

The  *  bigots,'  who  are  here  charged  by  the  Liberal  electors  of  York- 
shire with  reviving  mediaeval  Romanism,  are  not  Vaticanists,  but  Protest- 


APPENDICES.  '  95 

ant  bigots,  whose  sinister  predictions  tlie  Vaticanists  have  done,  and  are 
doing,  their  best  to  verify. 

Both  by  reason  of  the  language  of  this  extract,  and  of  its  being  taken 
out  of  the  actual  working  armory  of  one  of  the  great  electioneering  strug- 
gles for  the  County  of  York,  which  then  much  predominated  in  impor- 
tance over  every  other  constituency  of  the  United  Kingdom,  it  is  impor- 
tant. It  show^s  by  direct  evidence  how  the  mitigated  professions  of  the 
day  told,  and  justly  told,  on  the  popular  mind  of  England. 


APPENDIX  F  (p.  43). 

I.  From  the  Decree. 

'Et  primo  declarat,  quod  ipsa  in  Spiritu  Sancto  legitime  congregata, 
concilium  generale  faciens,  et  ecclesiam  Catholicam  repraesentans,  potesta- 
tem  a  Christo  immediate  habet,  cui  quilibet  cuj usque  stattis  vel  dignitatis, 
etiam  si  papalis  existat,  obedire  tenetur  in  his  qim  pertinent  adfidem  et 
extirpationem  dicti  schismatis,  et  reformationem  dicta3  ecclesise  in  capite 
et  in  membris.' — Cone.  Const.  Sess.  v.;  Labhe  et  Cossart^  tom.  xii.  p.  22. 

II.  From  the  account  of  the  Pope's  confirmation. 

'  Quibus  sic  factis,  sanctissimus  dominus  noster  papa  dixit,  respondendo 
ad  prsedicta,  quod  omnia  et  singula  determinata  conclusa  et  decreta  in 
materiis  fidei  per  praesens  concilium,  conciliariter  tenore  et  inviolabiliter 
observare  volebat,  et  nunquam  contraire  quoquo  modo.  Ipsaque  sic  con- 
ciliariter facta  approbat  et  ratificat,  et  non  aliter,  nee  alio  modo.' —  Cone. 
Const.  Sess.  xlv. ;  Lahhe  et  Cossart,  tom.  xii.  p.  258. 


APPENDIX  G  (p.  49). 

Zabbe,  Concilia^  x.  1127,  ed.  Paris,  1671,  Canon  II. 

*  Obedite  prmpositis  vestris^  et  subjacete  illis;  ipsi  enim  previgilant  pro 
animabus  vestris,  tanquam  rationem  reddituri ;  Paulus  magnus  Apostolus 
prsecepit.  Itaque  beatissimum  Papam  Nicolaum  tanquam  organum  Sanc- 
ti  Spiritus  habentes,'  necnon  et  sanctissimum  Hadrianum  Papam,  succes- 
sorem  ejus,  definimus  atque  sancimus,  etiam  omnia  qua)  ab  eis  synodice 
per  diversa  tempera  exposita  sunt  et  promulgata,  tarn  pro  defensione  ac 

'  In  the  Greek,  ibid.  p.  1167,  wf  opyavov  tov  ayiou  UvivfiaroQ  txovriQ. 


96  APPENDICES. 

statu  ConstantinopoUtanorum  ecclesim^  et  smnmi  sacerdotis  ejus,  Ignatii 
videlicet,  sanctissimi  Patriarchoe,  quam  etiam  pro  Photii,  neophyti  et  inva- 
soris,  expulsioiie  ac  condemnatione,  servari  semper  et  custodiri  cum  exposi- 
tis  capitidis  immutilata  pariter  et  illcesa.^ 
The  Canon  then  goes  on  to  enact  penalties. 


APPENDIX  H  (p.  55). 

It  appears  to  me  that  Archbishop  Manning  has  completely  misappre- 
hended the  history  of  the  settlement  of  Maryland  and  the  establishment 
of  toleration  there  for  all  believers  in  the  Holy  Trinity.  It  was  a  wise 
measure,  for  which  the  two  Lords  Baltimore,  father  and  son,  deserve  the 
highest  honor.  But  the  measure  was  really  defensive ;  and  its  main  and 
very  legitimate  purpose  plainly  was  to  secure  the  free  exercise  of  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  religion.  Immigration  into  the  colony  was  by  the  Charter 
free :  and  only  by  this  and  other  popular  provisions  could  the  territory 
have  been  extricated  from  the  grasp  of  its  neighbors  in  Virginia,  who 
claimed  it  as  their  own.  It  was  apprehended  that  the  Puritans  would 
flood  it,  as  they  did:  and  it  seems  certain  that  but  for  this  excellent  pro- 
vision, the  handful  of  Koman  Catholic  founders  would  have  been  unable 
to  hold  their  ground.  The  facts  are  given  in  Bancroft's  History  of  the 
United  States,  vol.  i.  chap.  vii. 

I  feel  it  necessary,  in  concluding  this  answer,  to  state  that  Archbishop 
Manning  has  fallen  into  most  serious  inaccuracy  in  his  letter  of  ISTovem- 
ber  10  (p.  6),  where  he  describes  my  Expostulation  as  the  first  event 
which  has  overcast  a  friendship  of  forty-five  years.  I  allude  to  the  sub- 
ject with  regret ;  and  without  entering  into  details. 


THE    END. 


SPEECHES 


OF 


POPE    PIUS    IX 


BY  THE 


RIGHT   HON.  W.  E.  GLADSTONE,  M.P, 

AUTHOR  OF  "THE  VATICAN  DECREES  IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON   CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE,' 

"VATICANISM,"  ETC. 


NEW     YORK: 

HARPER    &    BROTHERS,    PUBLISHERS, 

FRANKLIN    SQUARE. 

1-8  7  5- 


\  a  «  A  ay" 
UN-IVERSITT 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 


[Republished  from  the  Quarterly  Review  for  January,  1875.] 


Art.  YIII.' — Dlscorsi  del  Soimno  Pontefice  Pio  IX.,  proniLnm^ati 
in  Vaiicano,  ai  Fedeli  di  Roma  e  delV  Orhe,  dal  jprincijpio  delta 
sxta  Prigionia  fino  al  jpresente.  Yol.  I.,  Roma,  Aurelj,  1872 ; 
Yol.  IL,  Ciiggiani,  1873. 

As  a  general  rule,  the  spirit  of  a  system  can  nowhere  be  more  fairly, 
more  authentically  learned  than  from  the  language  of  its  accredited 
authorities,  especially  of  its  acknowledged  Head.  The  rule  applies 
peculiarly  to  the  case  of  the  Paj^acy  and  of  the  present  Pope,  from 
considerations  connected  both  with  the  system  and  wath  the  man.  The 
system  aims  at  passing  its  operative  utterances  through  the  lips  of  the 
Supreme. Pontiff;  and  as  no  holder  of  the  liigh  office  has  ever  more 
completely  thrown  his  personality  into  his  function,  so  no  lips  have 
ever  delivered  from  the  Papal  Throne  such  masses  of  matter.  Pope 
all  over,  and  from  head  to  foot,  he  has  fed  for  eight-and-twenty  years 
upon  the  moral  diet  wliich  a  too  sycophantic  following  supplies,  till 
every  fibre  of  his  nature  is  charged  with  it,  and  the  simple-minded 
Bishop  and  Archbishop  Mastai  is  hardly  to  be  recognized  under  the 
Papal  mantle. 

'  At  the  time  when  this  Article  was  Avritten  and  published  I  was  unaware  that  the  Rev. 
W.  Arthur  had  published,  in  a  small  volume  entitled  'The  Modern  Jove,'  a  searching  re- 
view of  the  contents  of  the  first  volume  of  the  'Discorsi,' or  I  should  not  have  omitted  to 
notice  it.  In  this  work  Mr.  Arthur  justly  comments  on  the  lack  of  disposition  to  estimate 
tliese  subjects  as  they  deserve  (p.  117);  an  indisposition  which  I  believe  to  be  more  charac- 
teristic of  life  and  its  organs  in  our  metropolis  than  in  the  countiy  at  large.  '  Tiie  Ultra- 
montane party  in  Rome,'  says  Mr.  Arthur,  'are  not  accountable  for  the  illusions  of  English 
politicians  and  clergy,  for  they  have  of  late  been  very  outspoken.'  He  also  cites  a  remarka- 
ble exclamation  of  Mr.  O'Connell's,  who,  on  hearing  it  stated  in  public  that  his  Church  had 
an  infallible  head,  cried  aloud,  'No,  an  infallible  body.* 


4  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

It  can  hardly  be  policy,  it  must  be  a  necessity  of  his  nature,  which 
prompts  his  incessant  harangues.  But  they  are  evidently  a  true  pict- 
ure of  the  man ;  as  the  man  is  of  tlie  system,  except  in  this  that  he, 
to  use  a  homely  phrase,  blurts  out,  when  he  is  left  to  himself,  what  it 
delivers  in  I'ather  more  comely  phrases,  overlaid  with  art. 

Much  interest  therefore  attaches  to  such  a  phenomenon  as  the  pub- 
lished Speeches  of  the  Pope;  and,  besides  what  it  teaches  in  itself, 
other  and  singular  lessons  are  to  be  learned  from  the  strange  juxta- 
''position  in  which,  for  more  than  four  years,  his  action  has  now  been 
exhibited.  Probably  in  no  place  and  at  no  period,  through  the  whole 
history  of  the  world,  has  there  ever  been  presented  to  mankind,  even 
in  the  agony  of  war  or  revolution,  a  more  extraordinary  spectacle  than 
is  now  witnessed  at  Eome.  In  that  city  the  Italian  Government  Iiolds 
a  perfectly  peaceable,  though  originally  forcible,  possession  of  the  resi- 
due of  the  States  of  the  Church ;  and  at  the  same  time  the  Pope,  re- 
maining on  his  gronnd,  by  a  perpetual  blast  of  fiery  w^ords,  tippeals  to 
other  lands  and  to  future  days,  and  thus  makes  his  wordy,  yet  not 
wholly  futile,  w^ar  upon  the  Italian  Government. 

The  mere  extracts  and  specimens  which  have  from  time  to  time  ap- 
peared in  the  public  journals  have  stirred  a  momentary  thrill  or  sigh 
or  shrug,  according  to  the  temperaments  and  tendencies  of  readers. 
But  they  have  been  totally  insufficient  to  convey  an  idea  of  the  vigor 
with  wiiich  this  peculiar  warfare  is  carried  on  ;  of  the  absolute,  appar- 
ently the  contemptuous,  tolerance  with  which  it  is  regarded  by  the 
Government  ruling  on  the  spot ;  or  of  the  picture  which  is  presented 
to  us  by  the  words  and  actions  of  the  Pope,  taken  as  a  whole,  and  con- 
sidered in  connection  with  their  possible  significance  to  the  future 
peace  of  Europe. 

Between  the  20th  of  October,  1870,  and  the  18th  of  September,  1873, 
this  octogenarian  Pontiff  (he  is  now  aged  at  least  eighty-two),  besides 
bearing  all  the  other  cares  of  ecclesiastical  government,  and  despite  in- 
tervals of  illness,  pronounced  two  hundred  and  ninety  Discourses, 
which  are  reported  in  the  eleven  hundred  pages  of  the  two  volumes 
now  to  be  introduced  to  the  notice  of  the  reader.  They  are  collected 
and  published  for  the  first  time  by  the  Eev.  Don  Pasquale  de  Francis- 
cis;  and,  though  they  may  be  deemed  highly  incendiary  documents, 
they  are  sold  at  the  bookshop  of  the  Propaganda,  and  are  to  be  had  in 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  5 

the  ordinary  way  of  trade  by  virtue  of  tliat  freedom  of  the  press  which 
the  Papacy  abhors  and  condemns. 

The  first  question  which  a  judicious  reader  will  put  is  whether  we 
have  reasonable  assurance  that  this  work  really  reports  the  Speeches  of 
the  Pontiff  with  accuracy.  And  on  this  point  there  appears  to  be  no 
room  for  reasonable  doubt.  Some  few  of  them  are  merely  given  as 
abstracts,  or  sunii ;  but  by  far  the  larger  number  in  exte?iso,  in  the 
first  person,  with  minutely  careful  notices  of  the  incidents  of  the  occa- 
sion, such  as  the  smiles,  the  sobs,  the  tears'  of  the  Pontiff  on  the  audi- 
tory; the  animated  gestures  of  the  one,  the  enthusiastic  shoutings  of 
the  other,  which  cause  the  lialls  of  the  Vatican  to  ring  again.  In  a 
detailed  notice,  which,  instead  of  introducing  the  First  Yolume,  is  rather 
inconveniently  appended  to  it  at  the  close,  the  editor  gives  an  account 
both  of  the  opportunities  he  has  enjoyed  and  of  the  loving  pains  he  took 
in  the  execution  of  his  task.  On  nearly  every  occasion  he  seems  to 
have  been  present  and  employed  as  a  reporter  (raccoglitore)  ;  once  his 
absenc6  is  noticed,  as  if  an  unusual  no  less  than  unfortunate  circum- 
stance (ii.  284).  In  a  particular  instance  (ii.  299)  he  speaks  of  the  Pope 
himself  as  personally  giving  judgment  on  what  might  or  might  not  be 
published  {savebhe  stato  ])iibhlicato^  se  co si  fosse  jyiaciiito  a  GHIj^otea 
volere  altrimenti).  The  whole  assistance  of  the  Papal  press  in  Pome 
was  freely  given  him  (i.  505).  Eyes  and  ears,  he  says,  far  superior  to 
his  own,  had  revised  and  approved  the  entire  publication  (i.  506).  The 
Preface  to  the  Second  Yolume  refers  to  the  enthusiastic  reception  ac- 
corded to  the  First,  and  announces  the  whole  work  as  that  which  is 
alone  authentic  and  the  most  complete  (ii.  14, 15).  So  that  our  footing 
plainly  is  sure  enough ;  and  we  may  reject  absolutely  the  supposition 
which  portions  of  the  book  might  very  well  suggest,  namely,  that  we 
were  read  in  o;  a  scandalous  Protestant  forejerv. 

Certainly,  if  the  spirit  of  true  adoration  will  make  a  good  reporter, 
Don  Pasquale  ought  to  be  the  best  in  the  world.  The  Speeches  he 
gives  to  the  world  are  ^a  treasure,'  and  that  treasure  is  sublime,  in- 


^  In  the  estimation  of  Don  Pasquale,  all  emotion,  if  within  the  walls  of  the  Vatican  and  on 
the  Papal  side,  is  entitled  to  respect,  and  must  awaken  sympathy  ;  but  when  he  has  to  describe 
the  tears  and  sobs  which,  as  he  states,  accompanied  the  funeral  procession  of  the  ex-Minister 
Ratazzi  (ii.  350),  he  asks,  Might  not  this  be  a  Congress  of  Crocodiles  (iion  seinbra  qtiesto  tin 
Congresso  di  Coccodrilli)? 


6  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

spired,  divine  (i.  1, 2, 3).  iN'ot  only  do  we  quote  these  epithets  textually, 
but  they,  and  the  like  of  them,  are  repeated  every  where,  even  to  satiety, 
and  perhaps  something  more  than  satiety.  *  Receive,  then,  as  from  the 
hands  of  angels,  this  Divine  Volume  of  the  Angelic  Pio  ISTono '  (p.  4) ; 
'  the  most  glorious  and  venerated  among  all  the  Popes '  (p.  3) ;  ^  the 
portentous  Father  of  the  nations'  (p.  11).  This  is  pretty  well, but  it 
is  not  all.  He  is  ^the  living  Christ'  (p.  9);  he  is  the  Yoice  of  God. 
There  is  but  one  step  more  to  take,  and  it  is  taken.  He  is  (in  the 
face  of  the  Italian  Government)  Nature,  that  protests :  he  is  God, 

THAT    C0NDE]MNS  (p.  17). 

In  a  letter  dated  December  10, 1874,  and  addressed  to  a  monthly 
magazine,*  Archbishop  Manning,  with  his  usual  hardihood,  says,  ^  For 
a  writer  who  affirms  tliat  the  Head  of  the  Catholic  Church  claims  to 
be  the  Incarnate  and  Visible  Word  of  God  I  have  really  compassion.' 
Will  this  bold  controversialist  spare  a  little  from  his  fund  of  pity  for 
the  editor  of  these  Speeches,  who  declares  him  to  be  the  living  Christ, 
and  for  the  Pope,  under  whose  authority  this  declaration  is  published 
and  sold  ? 

Truly,  some  of  the  consequences  of  a  '  free  press '  are  rather  start- 
ling. And  those  who  are  astonished  at  the  strained  and  preternatural 
tension,  the  surexcitatioii  ahnormale,  to  borrow  a  French  phrase,  the 
inflamed  and  inflaming  tone  of  the  language  ordinarily  used  by  the 
Pontiff,  should  carefully  bear  in  mind  that  the  fulsome  and  revolting 
strains,  of  which  we  have  given  a  sample,  exhibit  to  us  the  atmosphere 
which  he  habitually  breathes. 

Even  those,  however,  who  would  most  freely  criticise,  and,  indeed,  de- 
nounce the  prevailing  strain  and  too  manifest  upshot  of  these  Speeches, 
may  find  pleasure,  while  they  yield  a  passing  tribute  to  the  persevering 
tenacity  and,  if  we  may  be  pardoned  such  a  word,  the  pluck  which  they 
display.  It  may  be  too  true  that  the  Pope  has  brought  his  misfortunes 
on  his  own  head.  But  they  are  heavy,  and  they  are  aggravated  by  the 
weight  of  years ;  and  the  strong  constitution,  indicated  by  his  deep 
chest  and  powerful  voice,  has  had  to  struggle  with  various  infirmities. 
Yet  by  his  mental  resolution  all /cold  obstruction'  is  kept  at  arms- 
length ;  and  he  delivers  himself  from  week  to  week  or  day  to  day — 

*  Macmillan's  Magazine  for  January,  1875. 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  7 

sometimes, indeed,  more  than  once  in  the  day — of  his  copious  and  highly 
explosive  material,  with  a  really  marvelous  fluency,  versatility,  inge- 
nuity, energy,  and,  in  fact,  with  every  good  quality  except  that,  the  ab- 
sence of  which,  unhappily,  spoils  all  the  rest — namely,  wisdom.  And, 
odd  to  say,  even  the  word  wisdom  {saviezza)  seems  to  be  almost  the  only 
one  which  in  these  Speeches  does  not  constantly  pass  his  lips. 

Reversing  the  child's  order  with  his  plate  at  dinner,  let  us  keep  to 
the  last  that  which  is  the  worst,  and  also  the  heaviest,  part  of  the  task 
before  us;  and  begin  by  noticing  one  or  two  discourses  of  the  Holy 
Father  to  little  children,  which  are  full  of  charm  and  grace.  For  even 
very  little  children  go  to  him  on  deputations,  and,  reciting  after  the 
Italian  manner,  discharge  in  manufactured  verse  their  antirevolution- 
ary  wrath.  An  infant  of  five  years  old  denounces  before  him  the  sac- 
rilegious oppressor!  (ii. 405).  AnothQv  fanciulletta  declares  the  Pope 
to  be  the  King  of  kings  (ii.  465).  These  interviews  were  turned  by  the 
Pope  to  edification.  He  tells  the  children  of  their  jpeccatucci  (ii.  209) 
— how  shall  we  try  to  give  the  graceful  tournure  of  the  phrase  ?  '  dar- 
ling little  sins ;'  and  certain  orphans  lie  again  gently  touches  w^ith  the 
incomparable  Italian  diminutive  on  their  difettucci  and  their  rdbhiette^ 
and  lovingly  presents  to  them  the  example  of  their  Saviour: 

'  Now  that  the  Church  commemorates '  (it  was  on  Dec.  19)  '  the  birth  of  Jesus  Christ 
the  babe,  do  you  cause  Him  to  be  re-born  in  your  hearts ;  .  .  .  beg  Him  to  put  there  some- 
thing that  is  good,  namely,  a  good  will  to  study,  and  to  mind  your  Avork  and  all  your  other 
duties.' 

And  so  he  blesses  them,  and  sends  them  away  (ii.  119). 

There  are  other  examples  not  less  pleasing,  such  as  a  discourse  to 
some  penitents  of  the  Roman  Magdalen.  After  mentioning  the  case 
of  Rahab,  the  Pontiff  proceeds  in  a  tone  both  evangelical  and  fatherly 
(ii.57): 

'  You,  too,  my  daughters,  carry  the  red  mark  ;  you,  too,  carry  a  mark  able  to  deliver  you 
from  the  assaults  that  the  enemies  of  your  souls  will  make.  This  red  mark  you  have  put 
upon  you ;  and  its  meaning  is,  the  most  precious  blood  of  Jesus  Christ.  Often  meditate  on 
this  blood,  which  has  merited  for  you  the  grace  of  your  salvation  and  your  conversion.  At 
the  feet  of  the  crucified  Jesus,  even  as  once  did  the  repentant  Magdalen,  meditate  on  the 
love  that  He  has  shown  you,  and  you  will  triumph  over  all  your  enemies.' 

There  is,  perhaps,  not  a  word  of  this  affectionate  and  simple  address 
which  would  not  be  acceptable  even  if  it  were  delivered  from  a  Non- 
conforming pulpit,  so  devoid  is  it  of  the  specialties  of  the  Roman 
Church.     Kor  is  this  the  only  discourse  of  which  the  same  might  be 


3  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

said  (see,  for  instance,  Disc,  cxxii.).  Kor  must  we  very  sharply  com- 
plain if  sometimes  we  find  in  these  Discourses  the  religious  ideas  which 
we  are  wont  to  condemn  as  Popery.  They  are,  perhaps,  less  frequent 
and  flagrant  than  might  have  been  expected.  They  assume  promi- 
nence, however,  in  one  passage  particularly,  where  the  Pope  declares 
that  the  prayers  of  the  Mother  addressed  to  her  Son  have  almost  the 
character  of  commands  {Iianno  quasi  ragion  di  comando.,\\.d'd^) ;  and 
there  is  traceable  in  some  of  the  Addresses  a  curious,  sometimes  an 
amusing,  idea  of  the  personal  claim  upon  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary  and 
others  of  the  Saints,  which  he  has  established  by  his  acts,  especially 
constituting  the  Immaculate  Conception  a  part  of  the  Christian  faith. 
'  She  owes  you  the  finest  gem  in  her  coronet,'  says  one  deputation  (ii. 
325).  '  If,'  says  another, '  it  be  certain  that  gratitude  is  more  lively  in 
heaven  than  on  eartli,  let  him '  (here  we  are  dealing  with  St.  Louis,  to 
whom  the  Pope  had  erected  a  monument),  *  by  way  of  payment,  give 
you  back  your  crown'  (ii.  116).  And  again,  with  yet  greater  naivete, 
'  and  most  holy  Mary  the  Immaculate,  on  whom  you  conferred  so  great 
an  honor,  surely  she  will  never  allow  herself  to  be  outdone  in  generos- 
ity V  (ii.  26.) 

Next  after  the  personal  piety  and  genialit}",  which  not  even  all  the 
perversions  of  his  policy  can  extinguish  in  the  Pope,  some  s^mipathy 
remains  due  to  his  irrepressible  sentiment  of  fun.  To  this  even  social 
nimor  has  done  justice  in  some  cases.  For  example,  at  the  time  of  the 
Council,  when  his  hospitality  was  so  taxed  by  the  presence  of  large 
numbers  of  very  poor  bishops  as  to  threaten  him  with  an  empty  ex- 
chequer, he  is  commonly  reported  to  have  said,  'facendomi  iiifallibile, 
mi  faranno  fallire^ — '  while  declaring  me  ^m-failable,  they  will  cause 
me  to  fail.''  In  these  volumes  he  explains  to  a  group  of  children  the 
prevailing  redundance  of  demoniacal  action  in  Italy  by  recounting  an 
observation  then  recently  made  to  him, '  that  all  the  devils  had  been 
let  out  from  hell,  except  a  porter,  to  receive  new  arrivals.'  The  Preface 
shows  he  felt  the  ground  to  be  tender,  for  he  introduced  the  story  by 
saying  (i.  40) :  '  Here  I  should  like  to  tell  you  an  incident.  Yet  I  am 
doubtful,  as  it  might  excite  too  much  merriment ;  but  come,  I  will  give 
it  you.' 

This  for  children;  but  for  bishops  also,  newly  made  bishops,  he  has 
his  comic  anecdote,  and,  in  order  that  it  may  be  suitable,  he  chooses  it 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  0 

from  tlie  life  of  a  Saint,  though  a  modern  one.  Alphonso  Liguori, 
now  not  only  a  Saint,  but  also  lately  promoted  by  tlie  Pope  to  the  rank 
of  a  Doctor  of  the  Church,  in  his  time,  it  seems,  used  to  bore  the  Nea- 
politan Ministro  Tannucci,  and  consequently  sometimes  found  it  hard 
to  get  within  his  doors.  One  day,  having  long  to  wait,  the  Bishop  sat 
upon  the  steps  and  recited  his  '  corona ;'  and  he  recounts  his  weariness 
in  one  of  his  letters,  with  the  comment  which  shall  be  given  in  the 
original  tongue:  '  questo  henedetto  ministro  mi  fa  s^utare  unu  ala  di 
jyolmone'^  (ii.  286). 

The  Pope's  references  to  Holy  Scripture  are  very  frequent ;  and  yet 
perhaps  hardly  such  as  to  suggest  that  he  has  an  accurate  or  familiar 
acquaintance  with  it.  They  are  possibly  picked  piecemeal  out  of  the 
services  of  the  Church  for  the  day.  It  is,  for  example,  to  say  the  least, 
a  most  singular  method  of  reference  to  the  difficult  subject  of  the 
Genealogies  of  our  Lord  to  say  (i.  127), '  we  read  at  the  commencement 
of  two  of  the  Gospels  a  long  Genealogy  of  Him,  which  comes  down 
from  Princes  and  Kings.'  Where,  again,  did  the  Pontiff  learn  that  the 
Jews,  as  a  nation,  had  some  celebrity  as  smiths  (7ielV  arte  fahhrile^  i. 
169)  ?  with  which  imaginary  celebrity  he  oddly  enough  connects  tlie 
mention  of  the  antediluvian  Tubal-cain  in  Gen.  iv.  22.  Nor  can  any 
thing  be  more  curious  than  his  exegesis  applied  to  the  Parable  of  the 
Sower.  He  expounds  it  to  a  Poman  deputation  (i.  335).  The  way- 
side represents  the  impious  and  unbelievers,  and  all  who  are  possessed 
by  the  devil ;  those  who  received  the  seed  among  the  thorns  are  those 
who  rob  their  neighbor  and  plunder  the  Cliurch;  the  stony  places  rep- 
resent those  who  know, but  do  not  act.  ^  And  who  are  the  good  ground  ? 
You.  The  good  ground  is  that  w^hich  is  found  in  all  good  Christians, 
in  all  those  who  belong  to  the  numerous  Catholic  Clubs.'  Now  the 
Clubs  on  the  other  side  are  Clubs  of  Hell  (ii..420  lis) ;  sanctity  is  thus 
(here  and  commonly  elsewhere)  identified  with  certain  politics.  Nor 
does  it  seem  very  easy  to  trace  in  detail  the  resemblance  between  the 
exposition  of  the  Yicar  and  that  given  by  the  Principal  (Matt.  xiii.  18- 
23). 

Indeed,  the  Papal  Exegesis  appears  somewhat  frequently  to  bear 
marks  of  dormitation.  Thus,  placing  King  Solomon  at  a  date  of  twenty- 
two  or  twenty-three  centuries  back  (ii.  32),  he  makes  th^-t  sovereign  the 
cantemporary  either  of  Pericles  or  of  Alexander  the  Great.    More  im- 


10  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

portant,  because  it  is  a  specimen  of  the  willful  interpretations  so  prev- 
alent at  Rome,  is  the  mode  in  which  he  proves  his  right  to  be  the 
Teacher-general  of  all  States  and  all  nations,  because  (ii.  456)  Saint 
Peter  was  chosen,  in  the  case  of  Cornelius,  to  preach  the  Gospel  to  the 
Gentiles. 

Many,  again,  will  read  with  misgiving  the  Pope's  treatment  of  the 
text  (Luke  ii.  62) :  '  And  Jesus  increased  in  wisdom  and  stature.' 
'This  increase  was  only  apparent,  for  in  Him,  the  Son  of  God,  was' 
{i.  e.  was  already) '  the  fullness  of  all  wisdom,  as  of  every  virtue '  (i.  42). 
To  resolve  positive  statements  of  Holy  Scripture  into  mere  seeming  is 
not  a  mode  of  exposition  the  most  in  favor  with  orthodox  Christianity ; 
and,  if  it  is  to  be  applied  to  statements  affecting  the  Perfect  Humanity 
of  our  Lord,  to  what  point  is  it  to  be  carried  ?  The  Commentary  of 
Cornelius  a  Lapide,  which  will  not  be  viewed  with  suspicion  in  Roman 
quarters,  discusses  at  great  length  this  most  interesting  text,  and,  after 
considering  the  varied  language  of  the  Fathers,  proceeds  to  lay  it  down 
that,  besides  growth  in  appearance  and  in  the  opinion  of  men,  and  be- 
sides the  growth  of  what  we  term  experience,  *  tertio  et  propria,  esto 
Christus  non  creverit  sapientia  et  gratia  habituali,  crevit  tamen  actuali 
et  practica ;  nam  robur  spiritus  et  sapientiam  coelestem  in  anima  laten- 
tem,  indies  magis  et  magis  exerebat  etiara  existens  puer.'  Those  wlio 
desire  a  more  modern  statement  may  with  advantage  consult  a  beauti- 
ful passage  in  the  Commentary  of  Dean  Alford  in  loco. 

But  w^hat  is  really  sad  in  tlie  Scriptural  references  of  the  Pope  is 
the  incessant  and  violent  application  which  is  made  of  them  to  polit- 
ical incidents  and  circumstances,  and  the  too  daring  appropriation  to 
himself  of  passages,  very  exalted  indeed,  which  relate  to  our  Saviour. 

As  respects  the  former  of  these  topics,  we  may  take  as  an  example 
a  short  speiech  to  a  company  of  ladies  engaged  in  the  reclamation  of 
girls  who  have  lived  a  life  of  shame :  '  With  the  same  charity  and  zeal 
w^hich  you  have  employed  in  doing  good  to  these  girls,  by  reclaiming 
them  from  sin,  be  careful  to  pray  the  Almighty  that  your  charity  may 
also  reacli  all  the  enemies  of  the  Church.'  What  would  be  thought  of 
the  taste  of  any  Protestant  association  of  this  country  which  should 
exhort  the  managers  of  the  Magdalen  never  to  foi'get  praying  God  for 
the  conversion  of  Papists?  Tories  and  Liberals  might  in  this  way  re- 
ciprocally do  a  stroke  of  business  in  politics  while  exercising  their. 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  11 

charity  and  piety.  In  truth,  it  might  seem  to  the  readers  of  these 
volumes  as  if  the  putting  down  of  Italian  liberalism  and  nationality 
(which  are  for  the  Pope  one  and  the  same  thing)  had  constituted  the 
one  great  purpose  for  which  the  Gospel  had  been  sent  into  the  world. 
Certainly  no  one  can  complain  that  the  Pope's  injunctions  to  pray  are 
not  sufficient,  either  in  number  or  in  urgency:  they  are  incessant. 
Tiie  Pope  gives  no  countenance  whatever  to  the  theory  of  Professor 
Tyndall,  or  to  that  of  Mr.  Kniglit,  who,  as  we  understand,  so  cleverly 
settles  the  great  Prayer-controversy  by  'splitting  the  difference.'  But 
of  the  almost  innumerable  exhortations  to  pray  in  these  volumes,  at 
least  nineteen  in  twenty  are  directed  to  the  establishment  of  sound 
Papal  politics,  and  the  conversion,  or,  failing  this,  the  destruction  of  Lib- 
erals, as  though  they  were  the  people  of  some  new  Sodom  and  Gomor- 
rah, or  Tyre  and  Sidon  ;  to  the  triumph  of  the  Church,  and  the  restora- 
tion of  what  the  Pope,  with  his  peculiar  ideas,  is  pleased  to  call '  peace.' 

It  appears,  however,  that  the  comparison,  which  he  draws  indirectly 
between  women  living  by  the  wages  of  sin  and  Liberals,  admits  of  a 
yet  more  pungent  application  in  the  case  of  a  class  who  are,  in  the 
Pope's  eyes,  even  worse  than  Liberals.  These  are  the  bad  Catholics, 
who  have  'disdained  the  light  of  faith.'  These  will,  he  says  (ii.  31), 
be  judged  more  severely  than  women  who  live  in  shame,  but  who  are 
far  more  likely  to  repent.  'The  light  of  faith'  is,  we  opine,  that  of 
the  Vatican. Council ;  and  the  'bad  Catholics'  appear  to  be  the  emi- 
nent men  who  declined  to  affirm  as  immemorial  truths  the  novelties 
and  the  histori(^al  falsehoods  it  imposed. 

One  touch  remains  to  be  added  to  this  portion  of  the  extraordinary 
picture.  The  prisoner  not  imprisoned,  who  is  weekly  visited  by  crowds 
or  companies  of  lawbreakers,  glorying  in  impunity,  receives  from  them, 
and  from  the  sycophants  about  him,  an  adulation  not  only  excessive  in 
its  degree,  but  of  a  kind  which,  to  an  unbiased  mind,  may  seem  to 
border  on  profanity.  To  compare  him  with  the  Scripture  worthies 
generally  is  not  enough.  Claiming,  under  the  new-fangled  Roman 
religion,  to  possess  in  his  single  hands  all  the  governing  powers  of  the 
Eedeemer  over  his  Church,  it  is  also  in  the  sufferings  of  Christ  alone 
that  he  and  his  worshipers  —  he  with  some  little  excuse,  they  with 
hardly  any — find  a  fit  standard  of  comparison  for  what  he  has  to 
endure.     Now  as  to  his  own  sufferings,  we  have  no  doubt  he  must 


f'JN'IVri.RSITYj 

j-2'^^''^   '    "  ■^'^        SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

suffer  much,  when  he  looks  abroad  over  the  Christian  world,  and  reck- 
ons up  tlie. results  of  what  the  most  distinguished  of  our  Roman  Cath- 
olic lajmen,  in  a  lecture  to  the  Roman  Catholics  of  a  midland  town, 
recently  and  justly  called  the  longest  and  most  disastrous  Pontificate 
on  record.  But  the  sufferings  mentioned  incessantly  in  this  book  are 
the  sufferings  pretended  to  be  inflicted  by  the  Italian  kingdom  upon 
the  so-called  Prisoner  of  the  Vatican.  Let  us  see  how,  and  with  what 
daring  misuse  of  Holy  Scripture,  they  are  illustrated  in  the  authorized 
work  before  us.  'He  and  his  august  consort,'  says  Don  Pasquale, 
speaking  of  the  Count  and  Countess  de  Chambord, '  were  profoundly 
moved  at  such  great  afflictions  which  the  ZajJih  of  the  Vatican  {VAg- 
nello  del  Vaticano,  ii.  545)  has  to  endure.' 

On  the  23d'  of  March,  1873  (ii.  291),  the  Pope  draws  a  picture  of  tlie 
Apostles  repairing  to  our  Lord,  and  desired  by  Him  to  take  their  rest 
around  Him.     He  proceeds  : 

'  Even  now  there  is  a  parallel  to  this  ;  when  from  different  parts  of  the  Catholic  world  the 
l)ishops  and  missionaries  repair  to  Rome  that  they  may  give  account  of  their  missions  to  the 
present  most  unworthy  Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  find  within  the  narrow  limits  of  the  Vatican 
an  interval  of  rest  from  their  labors.' 

On  the  3d  of  July,  1871  (i.  131),  the  Pope  reminds  his  ex-eraployes 
of  the  solemn  words  used  by  St.  Thomas  when  he  proposed  to  accom- 
pany his  Master  to  death :  '  Let  us  also  go,  that  we  may  die  with  him ' 
(John  xi.  16).  'You,'  he  says,  'are  they  who  this  morning  resemble 
those  faithful  followers  of  Jesus  Christ,  in  your  visit  to  the  foot  of  the 
Pontifical  throne.'  On  the  5th  of  August,  1871,  he  is  visited  by  l;he 
Figlie  di  Maria,  and  again  he  compares  their  visit  to  the  act  of  tlie 
Blessed  Virgin  and  her  companions,  who  stood  by  the  Cross  of  Christ 
(ii.  212).  He  adds:  'It  is  not,  however,  true  that  on  my  Calvary  I 
suffer  the  pains  which  Jesus  Christ  suffered  on  his ;  and  only  in  a  cer- 
tain sense  can  it  be  said  that  in  me  there  is  renewed  in  figure  all  tliat 
was  in  fact  accomplished  on  the  divine  person  of  the  Redeemer.' 
Even  so  he  quotes  the  inexpressibly  solenm  words  of  our  Lord  at  tlie 
moment  of  his  capture  (John  xviii.  9) :  '  I  am  the  Yicar  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  I  have  the  right  to  employ  the  very  words  of  Jesus  Christ.  My 
Father,  those  whom  thou  hast  given  me  I  will  not  lose  {quos  dedisti 
mihi,  non  jperdarri)^  ^ 

'It  is  strange  to  observe  that  the  words  quoted  by  the  Pope  do  not  correspond  with  the 
Vulgate  (ed.  Frankfort,  1826,  with  the  approbation  of  Leo  XII.),  either  in  John  xviii.  9,  where 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  13 

It  is  futile  to  attempt  a  defense  of  language  such  as  this  by  alleging 
that,  according  to  the  beautiful  observation  of  St.  Augustine,  Christ  is 
relieved  in  his  poor,  and  that,  according  to  the  yet  loftier  teaching  of 
St.  Paul,  the  measure  of  his  sufferings  is  filled  up  in  his  saints.  Where 
St.  Paul  withheld  his  foot,  Pius  IX.  does  not  fear  to  tread.  Where 
St.  Paul  gave  the  catalogue  of  his  sufferings,  no  less  truthful  than  ter- 
rible (2  Cor.  xi.  23-27),  he  did  not  call  them  his  Calvar}^,  as  the  Pope 
calls  his  voluntary  sojourn  within  the  walls  of  a  noble  palace  which  is 
open  to  all  the  w^orld,  and  which  he  can  inhabit,  leave,  re-enter,  when 
and  as  he  pleases.  When  he  recorded  the  good  deeds  of  Priscilla  and 
Aquila,  w^ho  for  his  life  had  exposed  their  own  (Rom.  xvi.  3),  he  did 
not  compare  even  these  noble  sacrifices  with  the  ministries  rendered  in 
the  Gospels,  by  her  whom  the  Pope  teaches  us  to  deem  the  holiest  of 
w^omen,  to  the  Son  of  God  himself.  Ilis  sublimity  is  ever  as  simple, 
natural,  and  healthy  as  tlie  daring  and  stilted  phrases  of  the  modern 
Vatican  are  the  reverse. 

If  the  Pope  sees  in  his  own  official  character  such  high  personal 
titles  and  such  nearness  to  Christ,  it  can  be  no  w^onder  that  he  should 
raise  those  titles  which  are  official  to  an  extraordinary  altitude.  He 
does  not,  indeed,  quite  emultite  in  all  points  the  astounding  language 
of  Don  Pasquale,  who  always  goes  mad  in  w^hite  linen  when  the  Pope 
goes  mad  in  w^hite  satin.'  Yet  he  says  (ii.  265),  '  Keep,  my  Jesus, 
through  the  instrumentality  of  the  successors  of  the  Apostles  through 
the  instrumentality  of  the  clergy,  this  flock,  that  God  has  given  to  you 
and  to  tne? 

E"o  wonder,  then,  as  he  is  thus  partner  with  Christ  in  a  separate  and 
transcendent  sense,  that  he  should  give  us  as  a  rule  for  our  Italian  pol- 
itics. Whoever  is  for  me,  is  for  God  (Chi  e  con  me,  h  con  Dio).  It  may 
be  thought  that  this  is  the  assumption  which  all  Christian  men  should 
make.     Put  that  is  not  his  opinion.     When  similar  manifestations  of 


it  reads  quos>  dedisti  jnihi,  non  perdidi  ex  eis  quemquam,  or  in  John  xvii.  1 2,  Avhere  the  words 
are  quos  dedisti  viihi,  custodivi. 

^  In  speaking  of  the  probable  condition  of  Ratazzi  in  the  other  world  (ii.  342),  the  Pope 
says  he  knows  not  what  his  fiite  may  be,  and  is  satisfied  with  calling  him  qiiesto  infelice.  Don 
Pasquale,  on  the  other  hand  (p.  3-18),  says  that  the  Pope  being  the  Supreme  Judge  in  the 
Church,  Avas  thereby  entitled  to  ]n-onounce  a  sentence  far  more  definite  and  terrific  on  the 
unhappy  sectarian,  but  was  pleased  to  hide  his  judgment  under  the  inscrutable  veil  of  the 
judgments  of  God. 


14  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

piety  are  hazarded  on  behalf  of  the  Italian  Government,  mildly  to  con- 
secrate their  cause,  which  is  after  all  the  cause  of  a  great  nation,  he 
executes  summary  justice  (ii.  317)  upon  such  pretenses.  '  Somebody 
has  had  the  boldness  to  write,  "  God  is  not  on  the  side  of  the  Pope,  but 
on  the  side  of  Italy."  This  assertion,  somewhat  impudent,  is  contrarj^ 
to  tlie  facts.  And  first  of  all  I  shall  say  that,  if  Italy  is  w4th  God, 
then  assuredly  she  is  with  his  Yicar.'  It  is  all  of  a  piece.  Xothiug 
but  the  superhuman  is  good  enough  for  the  Pope ;  and  in  the  next 
edition  of  the  Eoman  religion  probably  even  this  will  not  do.  We 
have  already  shown  where  Don  Pasquale,  an  accomplished  professor 
of  flunkeyism  in  things  spiritual,  calls  the  Pope  outright  by  the  term 
'  inspired.'  Again,  in  presenting  his  volumes  to  Count  de  Chambord 
(ii.  547),  he  has  it  thus : 

*  Nel  gran  volume,  ove  il  Divin  fecondo 
Spirto,  parlando  Pio,  suo  verbo  detta.' 

I^or  can  it  be  said  that  the  Pope  himself,  here  at  least,  falls  short  of 
his  obsequious  editor,  when  we  observe  the  view  he  takes  of  his  own 
authority  as  matched  with  that  of  an  inspired  prophet ;  even  of  him 
whom  God  '  seiit  unto  David'  (i.  364),  and  who  professed  to  tell  out  to 
the  King  the  very  words  which  the  Lord  had  given  him  (2  Sam.  vii. 
1-14).  To  the  parishioners  of  two  Eoman  parishes,  he  as  '  their  Sov- 
ereign,' explains  the  misconduct  and  false  position,  not  of  Italy  only, 
but  of  the  governments  generally :  he  coolly,  after  his  manner,  appro- 
priates to  himself  the  w^ords  of  our  Lord,  '  He  that  is  not  with  me,  is 
against  me ;'  and  then,  apparently  under  some  strange  paroxysm  of 
excitement,  he  proceeds  (i.  365) : 

'  You  have,  then,  my  beloved  children,  the  few  words  which  I  desired  to  say  to  yon.  But 
I  go  farther.  My  wish  is  that  all  governments  should  know  that  I  am  speaking  in  this 
strain.  I  wish  that  they  should  know  it,  inasmuch  as  I  do  it  for  their  good.  And  I  have 
the  right  to  speak,  even  viore  than  Nathan  the  prophet  to  David  the  King  (anche  piu  che 
Natan  prof  eta  al  Re  Davide),  and  a  great  deal  more  than  Ambrose  had  to  Theodosius.' 

The  comparison  with  St.  Ambrose,  and  his  memorable  and  noble 
proceedings,  is  pragmatical  enough ;  but  it  is  entirely  eclipsed  by  the 
monstrous  declaration  by  the  Pope  of  his  superiority  to  an  inspired 
teacher.  We  spoke  some  pages  back  of  sighs  or  shrugs  as  the  signs  of 
emotion  which  the  Papal  utterances,  reported  in  the  public  journals, 
have  from  time  to  time  suo^orested.  But  if  Christendom  still  believes 
in  Christianity,  this  audacity,  of  which  Exeter  Hall  will  indeed  exult 


SrEECIIES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  15 

to  hear,  is  far  beyond  either  sighs  or  shrugs :  it  more  fitly  may 
cause  a  shudder. 

This  daring  assumption,  however,  is  not  an  accident  or  a  caprice ;  it 
is,  as  it  were,  a  normal  result  of  the  Pope's  habitual  and  morbid  self- 
contemplation,  of  monstrous  flattery  perpetually  administered,  and,  yet 
more,  of,  that  ecclesiastical  system  which  is  gradually  (and,  we  must 
hope,  without  any  distinct  consciousness)  raising  the  personal  glorifica- 
tion of  the  Pope  towards  the  region  of  a  Divine  worship,  due  from 
men  to  one  who,  in  these  volumes,  is  not  only  the  oflnicial  Vicar,  but 
also,  in  some  undefined  way,  the  personal  Pepresentative  of  God  on 
earth  (see  <?.  g.  i.  4.-30  ;  ii.  165).  Not  only  is  his  person  sacred  generally, 
but  we  have  the  sacred  hand  (i.  297),  and  the  sacred  foot  (ii.  56, 192, 
357) — nay,  even  the  most  sacred  foot  (ii.  330).  Well  may  Dr.  Elvenich' 
say  there  seems  to  be  meditated  a  Pope-worship  (Papstcult),  to  stand 
beside  the  God-worship.  Of  the  things  we  are  bringing  to  view,  many 
are  so  strange  that  they  can  hardly  at  once  be  believed.  In  this  in- 
stance, as  in  others,  the  true  passes  beyond  the  ordinary  limits  of  the 
credible. 

A  subordinate  part  of  this  syistem  is  to  be  found  in  the  curious  co- 
quetry which  the  work  exhibits  to  the  world  with  reference  to  the  as- 
sumption of  the  title  '  Pius  the  Great.'  In  dispersed  places  of  the 
volumes  it  is  applied — as  well  it  may  be  to  a  Pope  who  is  termed  in 
them  himself  a  prodigy  and  a  miracle.  These  precedents,  carefully 
gathered,  may  hereafter  form  an  important  element  in  some  catena 
demonstrative  of  a  general  consensus  of  mankind.  But,  moreover,  it 
seems  that  the  Marchese  Cavaletti,  a  leading  Pajpalino,  made  known 
to  the  Pope  that  good  Catholics  (a  phrase  which  here  means  flaming 
Ultramontanes)  desired  to  pay  him  two  new  honors.  One  of  them  was 
to  adjoin  to  his  name  the  title  of  II  Grande  (ii.  4S4-S7).  We  may, 
perhaps,  refer  to  another  scene,  acted  1800  years  ago,  not  far  from  the 
Vatican,  and  recorded  by  Shakespeare  : 

^Casca.  There  was  a  crown  offered  him:  and  being  offered  him,  he  put  it  by  with  the 
back  of  his  hand,  thus ;  and  then  the  people  fell  a  shouting.  ... 

^Brutus.  Was  the  crown  offered  him  thrice  ? 

' Casra.  AyOy  marry,  was't;  and  he  put  it  by  thrice,  every  time  gentler  than  other.' — 
Julius  Casar,  i.  2.  * 

So  the  Pope  gives  three  reasons,  as  they  may  be  called,  for  declin- 

^  JJer  uvfehlbare  Papst,     Breslau,  1874-5. 


1(5  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

ing,  or  rather  for  not  accepting;  ^ every  reason  gentler  than  other.' 
The  first  is  that  our  Saviour  when  called  '  Good  Master,'  replied  '  that 
God  alone  is  good.'  The  second,  that  ^  God  is  great  and  worthy  to  be 
praised.'  The  third  admits  that  three  truly  great  Pontiffs  did  receive 
this  title,  but  only  when  they  were  dead  and  gone,  and  when  the  judg- 
ments of  men  ^vere  therefore  more  calm  and  clear.  Hather  a  broad 
Lint  for  the  proper  time  when  it  arrives.  • 

But  it  is  time  to  turn,  with  whatever  reluctance,  to  the  truculent 
and  wrathful  aspect,  which  unhappily  prevails  over  every  other  in 
these  Discourses. 

In  order,  however,  fully  to  appreciate  this  portion  of  the  case,  it  is 
necessary  to  bear  in  mind  that  the  cadres,  or  at  least  the  skeletons  and 
relics,  of  the  old  Papal  Government  over  the  Eoman  States  are  elabo- 
rately and  carefully  maintained;'  and  it  appears  to  be  one  of  the 
main  purposes  of  the  '  alms '  collected  from  the  members  of  the  Papal 
Church  all  over  the  w^orld,  as  doubtless  they  are  aware,  to  feed  ex-cus- 
tom-house officers,  ex-postmasters,  and  ex-policemen.  All  these  in  their 
turn,  and  the  representatives  of  several  other  departments,  have  from 
time  to  time  been  received  by  the  Pope  in  solemn  deputation,  and  reap 
their  full  share  of  compliment,  if  not  as  martyrs,  yet  as  confessors  of 
the  Church.  The  police,  indeed,  who  in  Italy  have  had  but  an  un- 
savory reputation,  and  in  Rome  were  notoriously  the  scum  of  the 
earth,  have,  notwithstanding,  been  deemed  worthy  to  lead  the  van  (i. 
46)  on  the  20th  of  January,  1871.  The  ex-functionaries  of  the  Post- 
Ofiice  follow  on  February  5  (p.  50),  and  are  gravely  assured  by  his 
Holiness  that  the  Catholic  public  are  every  where  in  fond  admiration 
of  the  conduct  of  the  ex-employes,  ^nd  that  their  noble  conduct  echoes 
through  every  portion  of  the  world  !  With  a  force  of  imagination 
such  as  this,  it  never  can  be  difficult  to  make  a  case  into  what  one 
wishes  it  to  be.  The  Eegister-Office  follows,  with  the  Stamp  Depart- 
ment, and  alas !  the  Lottery,  on  the  9th  of  March  (p.  71) ;  and  a  very 
conspicuous  place  is  given  to  the  repeated  military  deputations  (i.  09, 
:67,  99). 

^  We  ^ave  seen  it  stated  from  a  good  quarter  that  no  less  than  three  thousand  pei-sons, 
formerly  in  the  Papal  employ,  now  receive  some  pension  or  pittance  from  the  Vatican. 
Doubtless  they  are  expected  to  be  forthcoming  on  all  occasions  of  great  deputations,  as  they 
may  be  wanted,  like  the  supers  and  dummies  at  the  theatres. 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  17 

We  must  carefully  bear  in  mind  that  none  of  these  appear  at  the 
Vatican  as  friends,  as  co-religionists,  as  receivers  of  the  Pontiff's  alms, 
or  in  any  character  which  could  be  of  doubtful  interpretation.  They 
appear  as  being  actually  and  at  the  moment  his  subjects,  and  his  mili- 
tary and  civil  servants  respectively,  although  only  in  disponihilitd,  or 
(so  to  speak)  on  furlough;  they  are  headed  by  the  proper  leading  func- 
tionaries, and  the  Pope  receives  them  as  persons  come  for  the  purpose 
of  doing  homage  to  their  Sovereign  (pp.  SS,  865).  Thickly  set  among 
all  these  appear  the  deputations  of  the  Poman  aristocracy.  True,  its 
roll  is  not  complete ;  for  by  far  the  most  distinguished  member  of  the 
body,  the  able,  venerable,  and  highly  cultivated  Duke  of  Sirmoneta,  is 
a  loyal  subject  of  the  Italian  Kingdom.  As  to  the  residue  (so  to  call 
them),  they  are  those  of  whom  Edmund  About  sarcastically  said,  He- 
las!  lesjpauvres  gens!  Us  n^07itjpas  meme  de  vices!  They  constitute, 
however,  a  mainstay  of  the  Papal  hope.  It  w^as  to  them  he  announced 
(i.  147-8)  that  Aristocracy  and  Clergy  were  the  true  props  of  thrones, 
that  plebeian  support  was  naught,  and  that  Jesus  Christ  loved  the  aris- 
tocracy, and  belonged  to  it — in  a  somewhat  wide  construction  of  the 
word  it  must  be  owned. 

But,  if  we  are  to  accept  the  statements  of  this  approved  Reporter, 
the  popular  gatherings  were  frequent,  and  not  more  frequent  than  re- 
markable, in  the  halls  of  the  Vatican.  One  or  two  parishes  would 
yield  deputations  said  to  consist  of  1000  or  1500  persons.  Put  the 
numbers  assembled  often,  as  we  shall  see,  went  far  beyond  this  mark. 
Great  masses  of  persons  were,  and,  we  presume,  still  are  encouraged  to 
congregate  in  the  Vatican  for  the  purpose  of  presenting  most  seditious 
and  rebellious  Addresses,  and  of  hearing  highly  sympathetic  Peplies. 

We  should  have  supposed  it  impossible  that  the  language  of  treason 
against  Italy  could  go  bej^ond  the  license  of  these  volumes.  In  a  few 
cases,  however,  our  editor  informs  us  that  it  has  been  thought  right, 
once  under  the  direct  order  of  the  highest  personage  concerned,  to 
keep  back  from  the  press  some  portion  of  the  language  used  (ii.  299). 
What  has  been  published  is  certainly  flagrant  up  to  the  highest  degree 
of  flagrancy  yet  known  in  the  annals  of  the  Popedom  or  the  world ; 
though  it  may  be  reserved  for  Pius  IX.  in  this  point,  as  in  others,  to 
surpass  his  predecessors,  as  they  have  surpassed  the  rest  of.  men.  The 
Discourses  generally,  and  all  the  daring  defiances  of  law  which,  with 

B 


18  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

the  Addresses,  they  contain,  are  ordinarily  reproduced  in  the  Osserva- 
tore  Bomano ;  and  words  spoken  in  the  air,  or  taken  from  private 
manuscripts,  are  thus  at  once  converted  into  the  grossest  offenses  against 
public  order  that  a  press  can  commit/ 

And  all  this  is  borne  and  allowed  by  the  tyrannical  Italian  Govern- 
ment, which  keeps  the  Pope  a '  prisoner,'  and  under  which,  as  the  Pope 
declares,  ^  for  good  men  and  for  Catholics  liberty  does  not  exist'  {qiiesta 
libertdjjper  gli  uomini  onesti  e  jpei  Cattolicl  non  esiste,  ii.  25). 

We  have  already  glanced  at  the  nature  of  the  audiences  to  which,  are 
addressed  the  speeches  we  are  now  about  to  describe,  as  far  as  samples 
can  describe  them.  We  turn  to  the  speeches  themselves.  '  What  bold- 
ness,' says 'the  Prince  Consort,  speaking  of  the  King  of  Prussia  in  1847,^ 
'  in  a  king  to  speak  extempore  !'  With  his  sagacious  mind,  had  he  seen 
what  a  Pope  could  do,  he  would  have  been  tempted  to  double  or  treble 
his  notes  of  admiration. 

It  is  hardly  possible  to  convey  to  the  mind  of  the  reader  an  adequate 
idea  of  the  wealth  of  vituperative  power  possessed  by  this  really  pious 
Pontiff.  But  it  is  certainly  expended  with  that  liberality  which  is  so 
strictly  enjoined  by  the  Gospel  upon  all  the  rich.  The  Italian  Govern- 
ment and  its  followers,  variously  in  their  various  colors,  are  wolves ; 
perfidious  (ii.  83);  Pharisees  (i.  254,  380) ;  Philistines  (ii.322);  thieves 
(ii.  34,  65) ;  revolutionists  (i.  365,  and  j9«55^*m) ;  Jacobins  (ii.  150, 190) ; 
sectarians  (i. 334);  liars  (i. 365;  ii.l56);  hypocrites  (i. 341 ;  ii.l79);  drop- 
sical (ii.  ^%) ;  impious  {passim) ;  children  of  Satan  (ii.  263) ;  of  perdi- 
tion, of  sin  (i.  375),  and  corruption  (i.  342) ;  enemies  of  God  (i.  283,  332, 
380) ;  satellites  of  Satan  in  human  flesh  (ii.  326) ;  monsters  of  hell,  de- 
mons incarnate  (i.  215,  332;  ii.  404);  stinking  corpses  (ii.  47);  men  is- 
sued from  the  pits  of  hell  (i.  104, 176-— these  are  the  conductors  of  the 
national  press) ;  traitor  (i.  198) ;  Judas  (ihid) ;  led  by  the  spirit  of  hell 

^  It  is  also  to  be  observed  that  we  know  from  other  sources  of  at  least  one  deputation  to  the 
Pope  which  has  been  omitted  by  Don  Pasquale  from  the  record.  See  the  Keport  of  the 
Council  of  the  League  of  St.  Sebastian  for  1872,  read  at  General  Meeting,  January  20,  1873, 
p.  5:  'On  June  21  a  deputation  from  the  League  had  the  honor  of  an  audience  with  the 
Sovereign  Pontiff,  and  presented  an  address  of  congratulation  and  sympathy.  The  deputa- 
tion was  introduced  by  the  Hon.  and  Right  Rev.  Monsignore  Stonor,  and  was  composed  of 
Count  de  la  Poer,  M.P.,  Captain  Coppinger,  Mr.  Winchester,  and  Mr.  Vansittart.  On  this 
occasion,  as  on  the  last,  the  Holy  Father  bestowed  his  blessing  on  the  League  and  all  con- 
nected with  it.' 

'  Life  of  the  Prince  Consort,  i.  407. 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  10 

(i.  311) ;  teachers  of  iniquity  (i.  340 — these  are  evangelical  ministers  in 
their  'diabolical'  halls);  hell  is  unchained  against  him  (ii. 387),  even 
its  deepest  pits  (i.  368 ;  ii.  179).  Nearly,  if  not  quite,  every  one  of  these 
words  is  from  the  Pope's  own  lips ;  and  the  catalogue  is  not  exhaustive. 
Yet  he  invites  children,  and  not  children  only,  but  even  his  old  postmen 
and  policemen,  to  keep  a  watch  over  their  tongue  I  {oustodendo  genero- 
samente  la  lingua^  ii.  125).  To  call  these  flowers  of  speech  is  too  much 
below  the  mark — nay,  they  are  of  themselves  a  flower-garden — nay, 
they  are  a  Flora,  fit  to  stock  a  continent  afresh,  if  every  existing  spe- 
cies should  be  extinct.  It  may  be  thought  that  other  illustrations  may 
seem,  after  these,  but  flat  and  stale ;  nevertheless  we  must  resume. 
What  remains  will  be  found  worthy  of  what  has  preceded. 

After  wliat  we  have  shown  of  the  relation  which  the  Pontiff  imag- 
ines to  subsist  between  himself  and  the  person  of  our  Lord,  it  may 
seem  to  be  a  condescension  on  his  part  when  he  compares  himself, 
or  complacently  allows  himself  to  be  compared,  to  such  characters  as 
David  or  Tobias  or  Job.  Perhaps  these  are  introduced  by  way  of 
set-off  to  the  representations  of  the  unfortunate  Victor  Emmanuel,  who 
in  the  mouth  sometimes  of  the  Pope,  and  sometimes  of  those  who  ad- 
dress his  delighted  ear,  is  Ilolofernes,  as  in  ii.  143,  or  Absalom  (in  con- 
duct, not  in  attractions),  as  in  ii.  143,  or  Pilate,  Hei'od,  Caiaphas  (i.  461), 
or  Goliath  (ii.  301),  or  Attila.  Put  it  may  be  thought  our  citations 
thus  far  have  been  mere  phrases  torn  from  the  context;  and  the 
height  to  which  the  inflammatory  style  of  speech  is  capable  of  soaring 
will  be  more  justly  understood  if  we  quote  one  or  two  passages.  Let 
us  begin  with  vol.  ii.  p.  77 : 

'  Woe,  then,  to  him  and  to  them  who  have  been  the  authors  of  so  great  scandal.  The  soil 
usurped  will  be  as  a  volcano,  that  threatens  to  devour  the  usurpers  in  its  flames.  The  peti- 
tions of  millions  of  Catholics  cry  aloud  before  God,  and  are  echoed  by  those  of  the  protecting 
saints  who  sit  near  the  throne  of  the  Omnipotent  himself,  and  point  out  to  Him  the  profana- 
tions, the  impieties,  the  acts  of  injustice,  and  make  their  appeal  to  God's  remedies ;  but  to 
those  remedies  which  proceed  forth  from  the  treasures  of  His  infinite  justice.' 

The  Papal  thought,  shall  be  allowed  to  develop  itself  by  degrees. 
Giving  his  blessing  to  a  deputation  of  youths,  he  desires  it  may  ac- 
company them  through  life,  and  when  they  yield  their  souls  to  God. 

'  The  soul,  too,  will  the  impious  yield ;  but  will  yield  it,  as  Abraham  said  to  the  rich  Glut- 
ton' (Did  he  ?  Not  in  Luke  xvi.  2a,  20), '  to  pass  into  an  eternity  of  suffering,  amid  the  din 
of  the  blasphemies  of  the  devils  who  bear  that  soul  to  hell '  (i.  4-'30). 

But  who,  it  may  be  asked,  are  these  '  impious,'  whose  breath  has  the 


20  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

stencil  of  a  putrid  sepulchre  ?  (i.  341.)  The  answer  is  more  easy  than 
agreeable.  They  -are  simply  the  Liberals  of  Italy.  This  is  the  favor- 
ite word  for  them,  and  a  phrase  almost  exclusively  indeed  appropri- 
ated to  their  use.  One  passage  in  particular  fixes  the  meaning  beyond 
doubt.  The  Holy  Father  says  (i.  286):  'In  Rome,  not  only  is  it  at- 
tempted to  diffuse  impiety  all  around,  but  men  even  dare  to  teach 
heresy,  and  to  spread  unbelief.'  l!s"ow  as  impiety  proper  is  the  last 
and  worst  result  of  heresy  or  unbelief,  it  is  strange  at  first  sight  to 
find  it  placed  on  a  lower  grade  in  the  scale  of  sins.  But  when  we 
remember  that  in  these  volumes  it  simply  means  Italian  liberalism.,  the 
natural  order  of  ideas  is  perfectly  restored. 

To  a  popular  audience,  from  the  parish  of  San  Giovanni  de'  Fioren- 
tini,  he  says  (i.  374)  : 

'  At  the  top  of  the  pyramid  is  One,  who  depends  on  a  Council  that  rules  him ;  the  Coun- 
cil is  not  its  own  master,  but  depends  on  an  Assembly  that  threatens  it.  The  Assembly  is 
not  its  own  master,  for  it  must  render  an  account  to  a  thousand  devils  who  liave  chosen  it, 
and  who  drive  it  along  the  road  of  iniquity  ;  and  the  whole  of  them  together,  or  at  any  ]-ate 
the  chief  part,  are  bondmen,  are  slaves,  are  children  of  sin  :  the  Angel  of  God  follows  them 
up,  and  with  bared  sword  menaces  those  who  pretend  to  be  so  much  at  their  ease.  The  day 
will  come  when  the  destroying  Angel  will  cause  to  be  known  the  justice  of  God,  and  the  ef- 
fect of  His  mercies.' 

What  and  for  whom  His  mercies  are  wdll  be  seen  shortly.  To  cer- 
tain Clubs  Pius  IX.  says  (ii.  421,  his) : 

'  The  Cross,  appearing  in  that  valley  of  final  judgment,  will  crush,  with  the  mere  view  of 
it,  both  Deputies  and  Ministers,  and  some  one  else  (altri)  set  higher  still ;  and  all  those  who 
have  abused  the  patience  of  the  Eternal.  At  the  sight  of  that  Tree  will  tremble  all  the 
world,  and  the  peoples  bowed  down  to  earth  will  implore  the  mercy  of  the  divine  Redeemer, 
and  will  trust  in  him  ;  but  certain  persons,  to  whom  I  have  alluded,  and  that  are  now  in 
power  for  the  ruin  of  Church  and  people,  will  utter  cries  of  despair  and  trouble,  inasmuch  as 
there  will  be  no  mercy  for  them.' 

The  door  of  conversion  and  return  indeed  is  not  yet  closed,  and  fre- 
quent prayers  are  offered  for  them;  but  the  continued  support  of 
Liberalism  and  Italian  nationality  can  only  end  in  the  manner  of 
which  the  Pope  has  given  so  telling  a  description.  Thus,  for  example 
(i.  224) :  ^  _ 

'  Ah !  even  upon  these  I  invoke,  yet  again,  the  mercy  of  the  Lord,  that  He  may  convert 
them,  and  they  may  live !  But  I  say  at  the  same  time,  if  at  all  hazards  they  persist  in  re- 
fusing the  light  of  divine  grace,  well  may  God  at  length  accomplish  that  which  in  His  justice 
He  has  resolved  to  do. ' 

A  word  in  summing  up  this  portion  of  our  notice.  It  was  not  by 
words  of  scorn  that  Christ  began  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.     It  is  not 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  21 

by  words  of  scorn  that  the  Pope  will  revive  the  flagging  and  sinking 
life  of  Christian  belief  in  Italy,  or  will  put  down  the  spirit  of  nation- 
ality now  organized  and  consolidated,  or  will  convert  the  world.  It 
would  be  well  if  he  would  take  to  himself  the  words  of  a  living  En- 
glish poet : 

'For  in  those  days 
No  knight  of  Arthur's  noblest  dealt  in  scorn ; 
But  if  a  man  were  halt  or  hunched,  in  him 
By  those  whom  God  had  made  full-limbed  and  tall 
Scorn  was  allowed  as  part  of  his  defect, 
And  he  was  answered  sofily  by  the  King 
And  all  his  table.' ^ 

As  might  be  expected,  the  Addresses  to  the  Pope  are  not  tuned  to 
a  lower  pitch  than  his  Eeplies.  There  are  liardly  any  among  them 
which  do  not  contain  the  language,  commonly  the  most  burning  lan- 
guage, of  treason  and  of  sedition.  Manhood,  womanhood,  childhood, 
all  sing  in  the  same  key.  Innocence  and  sedition,  as  we  have  already 
observed,  join  hands.  The  little  one,  who  has  but  just  completed  a 
single  lustre,  announces  in  the  poem  she  recites  (ii.  406)  the  restol'ation 
of  the  Temporal  Power  over  Italy  and  the  whole  w^orld : 

*Poco  tempo  ancora,  e  Pio 
Regnera  sul  mondo  intiero.' 

The  lips  are  the  lips  of  infancy,  but  the  tune  has  the  true  ring  of 
the  Curia.  But  there  are  important  distinctions  to  be  observed. 
Even  distant  observers  may  appreciate  the  wisdom  with  which  the 
Government  of  Italy  leaves  to  the  Pope  a  perfect  freedom  to  speak 
his  mind  on  the  laws,  the  throne,  and  the  constituted  order  of  the 
country.  If  such  freedom  exists  we  can  not  well  expect  it  to  be  used 
in  any  way  but  one,  though  the  use  certainly  might  have  well  been 
restrained  to  less  frequent  occasions  and  a  more  civilized  range  of 
language.  However,  let  this  pass ;  and  let  every  allowance  be  made 
for  Papal  partisans  among  those  once  his  subjects.  But  what  are  we 
to  say  of  the  sense  of  public  propriety  among  foreigners — Englishmen, 
we  regret  to  say,  included  in  the  number — who  travel  from  distant 
countries,  and  abuse  the  immunity  thus  accorded  to  offer  public  and 
gross  insult  to  the  Italian  Government,  under  whose  protection  and 
liospitality  they  are  living  ?     Perhaps  the  most  inordinate  example  of 

'  Tennyson's  Guinevere. 


22  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

this  very  indecent  abuse  is  in  tlie  ^  most  noble  Catholic  deputation  of 
all  nations,'  which  made  its  appearance  in  the  Vatican  on  the  7tli  of 
March,  1873,  and  which  was  headed  by  Prince  Alfred  Lichtenstein 
(ii.  257).  In  their  address  tliey  denounce  'the  most  ignoble  violation 
of  the  law  of  nations'  by  the  Italian  Government,  their  'execrable 
crime,'  their  'hypocritical  assurances,'  and  so  forth.  Not  content  even 
with  this  outrage,  they  proceed  to  denounce,  of  their  own  authority,  all 
ideas  of  compromise  or  adjustment,  for  which  the  Government  of 
Italy  had  always  been  seeking. 

'  With  the  enemies  that  rage  against  you,  Holy  Father,  and  against  the  religious  orders, 
no  reconciliation  is  possible.  War,  waged  by  such  enemies,  is  not  terrible :  the  only  thing 
to  be  dreaded  in  this  case  is  peace.  [Bravo!  bravo!  bravo!]  No  doubt  they  would  be 
right  glad  to  conclude  with  you  a  perfidious  compromise;  they  ardently  desire  it.' 

And  then  with  incomparable  taste  on  the. part  of  such  Englishmen 
as  were  present  towards  the  King  of  Italy,  the  Ally  of  Her  Majest}^, 
'  Iso,  no ;  Peter,  alive  in  your  person,  will  be  ever  admirable  in  his 
heroic  resolution  against  Herod'  (ii.  257-9). 

After  more  slang  of  the  same  kind — from  persons  acting  thus  en- 
tirely beyond  their  right,  this  language  deserves  no  better  name — and 
a  glowing  eulogy  on  the  Syllabus  and  the  Encyclical,  the  addressers 
give  place  to  the  addressed,  who  assures  them  that  all  they  have,  said 
is  true,  though  some  of  it  severe  {ibid.  261).  Have  any  of  these  gen- 
tlemen, princes  and  others,  considered  what  sort  of  protection  their 
own  Governments  would  be  able  to  afford  them  if  the  Italian  Gov- 
ernment should  think  fit  to  take  proceedings  against  them,  or  to  expel 
them  summarily,  and  rather  ignominiously,  from  its  territory,  as  ene- 
mies of  the  public  peace  ? 

It  is  now  time  to  examine  by  such  lights  as  we  possess  what  is  real- 
ly the  actual  state  of  things  in  Pome,  which  furnishes  the  occasion  for 
the  violent  and  almost  furious  denunciations  of  the  Pope;  and  to  in- 
quire also  what  w^ould  be  the  state  of  things  which  he  desires  to  have 
established  in  its  stead. 

The  condition  in  which  he  thinks  himself  to  be  is  that  he  is  a  pris- 
oner in  the  Vatican ;  while  outside  its  walls  are  ruin,  oppression,  rev- 
olution, confusion,  and  unrestrained  blasphemy  and  profligacy.  And 
what  he  desires  is  simply  the  restoration  of  freedom  and  of  peace.  It 
will  not  be  at  all  difficult  to  perceive  what  the  Pope  signifies  by  free- 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  .    23 

dom  and  peace,  or  by  what  means  they  are  to  be  attained ;  but  first  a 
word  on  the  actual  condition  of  Eome.  It  never  had  the  name,  undei- 
the  Popes,  of  a  very  well-ordered  city.  The  Pontiff,  however,  speaks 
of  it  as  having  been  under  his  dominion  holy ;  whereas  now  it  is  a  sink 
of  corruption,  and  devils  w^alk  through  the  streets  of  it.  Now,  except 
upon  this  authority  of.  one  who  knows  nothing  except  at  second-hand, 
notliing  except  as  he  is  prompted  by  the  blindest  partisans,  it  seems 
totally  impossible  to  discover  any  evidence  that  Kome  of  1874  is  wo^se 
than  Rome  before  the  occupation,  or  worse  than  other  large  European 
cities.  And  this  really  is  a  question,  not  of  dogmatism  or  of  declama- 
tion, but  of  testimony;  and  not  of  the  testimony  of  prejudiced  asser- 
tion, but  of  facts  and  figures.  To  this  test  the  condition  of  every  city 
can  be  brought,  with  more  or  less  of  approach  to  precision ;  except, 
indeed,  under  a  system  like  that  of  the  Papal  Government,  when  the 
press  was  enslaved,  and  \he  stint  of  public  information  was  such  that 
even  a  copy  of  the  Tariff  of  Customs  Duties  was  not  to  be  had  in 
Rome  (as  happens  to  be  within  our  knowledge)  for  love  or  money. 
Now  these  odious  charges  that  a  peculiar  immorality  and  utter  disor- 
der prevail  in  Rome  are  launched  by  the  Pope  with  such  vagueness 
that  if  they  came  from  a  less  exalted  personage  they  would  at  once  be 
called  scurrilous  and  scandalous,  and  it  would  be  said,  here  is  a  com- 
mon railer  who,  having  no  basis  of  fact  for  his  statements,  takes  refuge 
in  those  cloudy  generalities,  under  color  of  which  fact  and  figment  are 
indistinguishable  from  each  other.  After  taking  some  pains  to  make 
inquiry  from  impartial  sources,  we  are  able  to  state  that  the  police  of 
the  national  Rome  is  superior  to  that  of  Papal  Rome,  that  order  is  well 
maintained,  crime  energetically  dealt  with.  . 

It  is  known  that  at  the  time  of  the  forcible  occupation  in  1870  a 
number  of  bad  characters  streamed  into  the  city;  but  by  energetic 
action  on  the  part  of  the  Government,  ill -supported  we  fear  by  the 
clergy,  they  were,  by  degixjes,  got  rid  of,  and  soon  ceased  to  form  a 
noticeable  feature  in  the  condition  of  the  place.  For  ostensible  mo- 
rality the  streets  will  conipare  fa\'orably  with  the  Boulevards  of  Paris, 
and  for  security  they  may  generally  challenge  the  thoroughfares  of 
London.  We  cite  a  few  words  from  a  very  recent  and  dispassionate 
account : 

'  The  police  of  Rome  is  far  better  than  the  old  Papal  police ;  order  is  better  kept,  and  out- 


24 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 


rages  in  the  streets  are  of  rare  occurrence.  Crime  is  promptly  repressed.  .  .  .  Tlie  theatres 
are  not  much  frequented,  and  are  neither  worse  nor  better  than  such  places  elsewhere.  The 
city  is  clean  and  well  kept.  There  are  not  half  the  number  of  priests  or  friars  in  the  streets, 
and  mendicancy  is  not  a  tenth  part  of  what  it  was  formerly.' 

We  are  entitled,  indeed,  to  waive  entering  upon  any  rnore  minute 
particulars  until  the  charges  liave  been  lodged,  with  some  decent  at- 
tention to  presumptions  of  credibility.  But  it  has  been  our  care  to  ob- 
tain from  Rome  itself  some  figures,  on  which  reliance  may  be  placed. 
They  indicate  the  comparative  state  of  Roman  crime  in  the  two  last 
full  years  of  the  Papal  rule  (1868, 1869),  and  the  three  full  years  (1871, 
1872, 1873)  of  the  Italian  rule : 


1868. 

1869. 

1871. 

1872. 

1873. 

Highway  robberies 

236 
802 
938. 

123 
714 

886 

103 

785 
i)72 

85 
859 
861 

26 
698 
603 

Thefts 

Crimes  of  violence 

Total. 

1976 

1723 

1860 

1805 

1327 

In  1870,  which  was  a  mixed  year,  and  does  not  assist  the  compari- 
son, and  which  was  also  a  year  of  crisis,  the  total  was  2118,  and  the 
crimes  of  violence  (rectti  di  sangiie)  were  no  less  than  1175.  It  will 
be  observed  that  these  figures  confute  the  statements  of  the  Pope. 
The  two  first  of  the  Italian  years  were  affected  by  the  cause  to  which 
we  have  referred ;  but  still  their  average  is  lower  than  that  of  the  two 
last  years  in  which  Rome  was  still  the  '  holy '  city,  and  in  which  devils 
did  not  walk  the  streets  of  it.  The  average  of  the  three  years  is  1665, 
against  1723  in  the  last  Papal  year.  The  year  1873,  in  which  alone  we 
may  consider  that  the  special  cause  of  disturbance  had  ceased  to  oper- 
ate, shows  a  reduction  of  391,  or  more  than  22  per  cent.,  on  the  last 
year  of  the  Pope.  Yet  more  remarkable  is  the  comparison  if  we  sti'ike 
out  the  category  of  thefts,  the  least  serious  of  the  three  in  kind.  We 
then  obtain  the  following  figures :  For  the  last  Papal  year,  1869, 1009 ; 
for  1873,  634 ;  or  a  diminution  of  nearly  40  per  cent. 

But  while  the  accusations  are  thus  shown  to  be  utterly  at  variance 
with  the  facts,  still  they  are  intelligible.  The  cursing  vocabulary,  so  to 
call  it,  which  has  been  given,  exhibits  their  character,  tliough  in  a  wild 
and  wholly  reckless  manner.  Where  the  passion  shown  is  rather  less 
overbearing,  there  is  more  of  the  daylight  of  ideas.  And  the  idea 
every  where  conveyed  is  briefly  this — that  a  state  of  violence  prevails. 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  25 

There  is  no  liberty  for  honest  men  or  for  Catholics  (ii.  25) :  matters  go 
from  bad  to  worse.  What  is  wanted  is  that  God  should  liberate  his 
Church,  give  her  the  triumph  (this  is  the  favorite  phrase)  whicli  is  her 
due,  and  re-establish  public  order  (i.  44) ;  it  is  to  escape  from  this  state 
of  violence  and  oppression,  which,  in  simple  truth  {davvero),m  insup- 
portable and  impossible  for  human  nature  (ii.  54).  As  for  the  Pope 
himself,  who  does  not  know,  so  far  as  Ultramontane  organs  all  over  the 
world  can  convey  knowledge,  that  he  is  a  prisoner  ?  Although,  it  myst 
be  confessed,  that  a  new  sense  of  the  word  has  had  to  be  invented  to 
serve  his  turn ;  for,  as  he  himself  has  explained,  his  prison  is  a  prison 
with  only  moral  walls  and  bars,  since  he  admits  there  are  neither  locks 
nor  keepers  (i.  298).  How,  with  his  sense  of  humor — how,  in  making 
these  statements,  must  he  inwardly  have  smiled  the  smile  of  the  Harus- 
pex  at  the  gross  credulity  of  his  hearers !  He  can  not  go  out ;  and  he 
will  not  (i.  75).  He  would  be  insulted  in  the  streets  (i.  298) ;  and  here, 
fortunately,  he  has  a  case  in  point  to  adduce,  for  once  upon  a  day  it 
happened  that  a  priest,  had  actually  been  pelted  ;  and  somewhere  else 
(i.  467)  it  appears  that  an  urchin  or  two  had  been  heard  to  shout '  7norte 
ai  jpreti ' — down  with  the  priests :  though  in  no  instance  does  he  show 
that,  even  if  a  stone  were  thrown,  the  public  authority  had  refused  or 
tampered  with  its  duty  to  afford  protection  to  layman  and  priest  alike. 
However,  as  we  have  seen,  the  Pope's  allegations  of  oppression  and 
violence  are  in  terms  very  grave.  But  his  own  lips  and  his  own  vol- 
umes unconsciously  supply  the  confutation  ;  and  this  in  two  ways  :  for, 
lirst,  it  is  clear,  if  we  accept  the  statements  of  this  curious  and  daring 
work,  that  the  people  of  Rome  are  almost  wholly  on  his  side  against  the 
Government,  not  on  the  side  of  the  Government  and  the  nation  against 
liim.  A  careful  computation  of  the  editor  (ii.  187)  reckons,  certainly  to 
the  full  satisfaction  of  all  Ultramontane  readers,  that  seventy-one  thou- 
sand of  the  inliabitants  of  Rome  (in  a  city  of  some  two  hundred  thou- 
sand, old  and  young,  men  and  women,  all  told)  have  given  their  names 
to  addresses  against  the  suppression  of  the  religious  ordere  (ii.  187) — a 
certain  sign  of  Papalism.  But  there  is  yet  more  conclusive  evidence. 
On  January  16, 1873,  the  whole  College  of  the  Parish  Priests  of  Rome 
presented  an  address,  in  which  they  state  that,  notwithstanding  the  in- 
fluence of  intruded  foreigners,  almost  the  whole  of  their  former  parish- 
ioners {nella  quasi  totalitd),  whom  they  know  by  name,  still  keep  the 


26  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

right  faith,  send  their  children  to  the  right  schools,  and  remain,  subject 
to  but  few  exceptions, '  with  the  Pope,  and  for  the  Pope.'  *  I  thank 
Thee,  my  God,  for  the  spirit  that  Thou  imparteSt  to  this  excellent  peo- 
ple :  I  thank  Thee  for  the  constancy  that  Thou  givest  to  the  peo2)le  of 
Kome'  (i.  352,  also  229).  And  yet  an  urchin,  or  perhaps  two,  or  even 
three,  cry  '  morte  ai  preti,^  and  the  Pope  dare  not  go  out  of  the  Vati- 
can, although  he  has  seventy-one  thousand  Eomans  declared  by  their 
sio^natures,  and  'almost  the  entire  body  of  parishioners,'  except  the 
new-come  foreigners,  for  his  fast  allies  and  loyal  defenders!  It  is 
really  idle  to  talk  of  dark  ages.  There  never  was,  until  the  nineteenth 
century  and  the  Council  of  the  Vatican,  an  age  so  deeply  plunged  in 
darkness  wortliy  of  Erebus  and  Styx,  as  could  alone  render  it  a  safe 
enterprise  to  palm  statements  like  these  on  tlie  credulity  even  of  the 
most  blear-eyed  partisanship. 

But  then,  it  may  be  said,  in  vain  are  the  people  with  the  Pope; 
a  tyrannical  Government,  supported  by  hordes  of  sbirri  and  a  brutal 
soldiery,  represses  the  manifestations  of  their  loyalty  by  intimidation. 
But  this  allegation  is  cut  to  pieces,  and  if  possible  rendered  even  more 
preposterous  than  the  other,  by  the  evidence  of  the  volumes  themselves. 
One  exception  there  appears  to  have  been  to  the  good  order  of  Rome : 
one  single  form,  in  which  a  kind  of  anarchy  certainly  has  been  permit- 
ted. TJiis  flagrant  exception,  however,  has  been  made,  not  against,  but 
in  favor  of  the  Pope.  For,  strange  and  almost  incredible  as  it  may  ap- 
pear, his  partisans  are  allowed  to  gather  in  the  face  of  day,  and  proceed 
to  the  Vatican  for  the  purpose  of  presenting  addresses  to  the  Pontiff 
kilown  to  be  almost  invariably  rife  with  the  most  flagrant  sedition,  and 
this-  in  numbers  not  only  of  a  few  tens  or  even  hundreds,  but  even  up 
to  1500,  2000.  (i.  242,  258,  353),  2600  (i.  362,  411),  3000  (ii.  92),  who 
shouted  all  at  once,  and  even  (ii.  94)  5000  persons ;  and  again  (i.  43S), 
a  crowd  impossible  to  count.  It  may  be  asked  with  surprise,  Has  the 
Pope,  then,  at  any  rate  a  presentable  train  of  five  thousand  adherents  in 
Pome?  Far  be  it  from  us  to  express  an  implicit  belief  in  each  of  our 
friend  Don  Pasquale's  figures^  at  the  least  until  they  arc  afiirmed  by  a 
declaration  ex  cathedra  or  a  Conciliar}^  Decree.  But  in  Pome,  where 
the  vast  body  of  secular  and  regular  clergy  have  held  so  large  a  pro- 
portion of  the  real,  property,  where  all  the  public  establishments  wei-e 
closely  associated  ^^ith  the  clerical  interest  and  class,  where  even  the 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  27 

inimerons  functionaries  of  the  civil  departments,  and  where  the  aris- 
tocracy, inchiding  families  of  great  wealth,  have  been,  and  continue  to 
be,  of  the  Papal  party,  a  long  train  of  dependents  must  necessarily  be 
found  on  the  same  side ;  and,  judging  from  what  we  have  seen  and 
known,  we  deem  it  quite  possible  that  in  the  entire  city  a  minority  of 
Papalini  numberiiig  as  many  as,  or  even  more  than,  five  thousand  might 
be  reckoned,  though  of  independent  citizens  we  doubt  whether  there 
are  five  hundred.  To  these  civic  adherents  would  add  themselves  for- 
eigners, whose  zeal  or  curiosity  may  have  carried  them  to  Kome  for  the 
purpose.  We  have,  indeed,  learned  from  an  authoritative  source  that 
on  June  16, 1871,  when  there  were  no  less  tlian  eight  Deputations,  the 
Pope  received  at  the  Vatican  in  all  about  6200  persons.  We  find  also 
that  the  total  number  of  those  who  waited  on  him  in  1871,  on  only  four- 
teen separate  days  (which,  however,  certainly  included  all  the  occasions 
of  crowded  gatherings),  were  estimated  carefully  at  13,893 ;  and  in  1872, 
on  the  same  number  of  occasions,  at  17,477.  In  the  two  following  years 
the  numbers  have  been  much  less,  namely,  8295  and  9129  respectively. 
It  is  quite  plain  that  large  crowds — crowds  sufiicient  to  give  ample 
ground  for  interference  on  the  score  of  order  to  any  Government  look- 
ing for  or  willing  to  use  them — again  and  again  have  filled  the  vast 
halls  of  the  Vatican,  as  Don  Pasquale  assures  us.  That  they  went  there 
to  stir  up  or  prepare  (as  far  as  it  depended  upon  them)  war,  either  im- 
mediate or  eventual,  against  the  Italian  Government,  is  established  by 
every  page  of  these  volumes.  Going  in  such  numbers,  and  for  such  a 
purpose,  it  is  not  disputed  that  they  have  gone  and  returned  freely, 
safely,  boastfully,  under  the  protection  of  the  laws  they  were  breaking 
and  of  the  Government  they  reviled. 

It  may  perhaps  seem  sti-ange  that,  while  the  Italian  Government  is 
treated  as  if  the  Pope  were  a  Power  in  actual  war  with  it,  yet  the 
Curia  apparently  can  stoop  to  communicate  with  it  for  certain  purposes, 
which  it  will  be  interesting  to  observe.  We  have,  for  instance,  in  the 
Appendix  (ii.  419)  a  letter  of  the  Cardinal  Vicar  to  the  Minister  Lanza, 
complaining,  as  the  Pope  in  his  Speeches  complains,  of  the  immorality 
of  the  lioman  theatres. 

It  complains  also  that  the  clerical  orders  are  not  spared  in  the  ex- 
hibitions of  the  stage.  This  is  a  subject  on  which  the  Curia  has  al- 
ways been  very  much  in  earnest ;  and  some  day  it  may  be  necessary  to 


28  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

bring  before  the  modern  public  the  ahnost  incredible,  but  yet  indubita- 
ble, history  of  the  negotiations  and  arrangements  which  were  made  by 
the  State  of  Florence  with  the  See  of  Rome  in  relation  to  the  'Decam- 
eron '  of  Boccaccio.  But  for  the  present  let  us  take  only  the  point  of 
immorality.  The  broadest  accusations  on  this  subject  are  lodged  by 
the  Cardinal  Yicar,  without  one  single  point  or-  particular  of  places, 
pieces,  persons,  or  times  which  would  have  enabled  the  Italian  Govern- 
ment to  put  their  justice  to  the  proof.  The  Minister,  in  his  reply, 
could  not  do  more  than  he  has  actually  done.  lie  declares  that  the 
Italian  Censorship  is  remarkable  for  strictness ;  and  that  in  Italy,  and 
particularly  in  Rome,  many  pieces  are  prohibited  which  are  permitted 
in  France  and  in  Belgium.  And  of  this  there  is  no  denial.  With  a 
thorough  shabbiness  of  spirit,  the  complaint  is  neither  justified  nor  re- 
tracted, but  is  sent  forth  to  the  world  with  the  full  knowledge  that  the 
good  {i  huo7ii)  will  take  it  as  a  demonstration  that  the  Italian  Govern- 
ment is  wholly  indifferent  to  morals  (ii.  419-424:). 

Again,  we  have  a  complaint  of  the  non-observance  of  Sundays  and 
feast-days;  but  the  effort  of  this  kind  which  most  deserves  notice  is 
one  relating  to  blasphemy.  It  appears  that  the  newspaper  La  Cajpi- 
tale  had  been  publishing  piecemeal  a  Life  of  our  Lord,  WTitten  in  the 
Unitarian  sense.  The  Cardinal  Yicar  represented  to  the  Procurator- 
General  (ii.  520)  that  this  ought  to  be  prosecuted  as  blasphemous  and 
heretical.  It  is  not  stated  that  he  founded  himself  on  the  manner  of 
the  writer's  argument,  and  therefore  it  may  be  presumed  that  the  charge 
lay  against  his  conclusions  only.  The  Procurator-General  replied  that 
the  law  granted,  liberty  of  religious  discussion,  and  that  accordingly  he 
could  not  interfere.  The  Advocate  Caucino,  of  Turin — whose  Address 
to  the  Pope  is  almost  the  only  one  in  the  whole  work  that  does  not  con- 
tain direct  incentives  to  sedition  (ii.  313) — gave  a  professional  opinion 
to  a  contrary  effect.  He  pointed  out  that  the  Roman  Catholic  religion 
was  by  the  Constitutional  Statute  the  religion  of  the  State,  and  that 
other  laws  actually  in  force  provided  punishments  for  offenses  against 
religion.  Consequently,  as  he  reasoned,  these  writings  are  illegal.  Over 
nine  hundred  of  the  Italian  lawyers  have  countersigned  this  opinion. 
One  of  his  arguments  is,  to  British  eyes,  somewhat  curious.  The  laws, 
he  says,  declare  the  person  of  the  Pontiff  sacred  and  inviolable.  'But 
if  you  take  away  the  Divinity  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  Pontiff  is  reduced 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX,  29 

to  a  nonentity  (il  Pontefice  non  ^  piii  nidla).^  It  is  difficult  to  avoid 
saying,  one  wishes  that  were  the  only  consequence. 

It  w^ould,  perhaps,  be  uncharitable  to  suggest  that  this  well-arranged 
endeavor  was  nothing  else  than  a  trap  carefully  laid  for  the  Italian 
Government.  But  it  certainly  would  have  served  the  pui-pose  of  a 
trap.  Had  the  denial  of  our  Lord's  Divinity  been  repressed  b;;^  law, 
by  reason  of  its  contrariety  to  the  religion  of  the  State,  tlie  next  step 
would  of  course  have  been  to  require  the  Government  to  proceed  in 
like  manner  against  any  one  w^lio  denied  the  Infallibility  of  the  Pope. 
Under  the  Vatican  Decrees  this  is  as  essentially  and  imperatively  a  part 
of  the  Eoman  Creed  as  is  the  great. Catholic  doctrine  of  the  Divinity 
of  Christ.  And  the  obligation  to  prohibit  the  promulgation  of  the  ad- 
verse opinion  would  have  been  exactly  the  same.  Kor  is  it  easy  to  sup- 
pose that  the  Curia  was  not  sharp  enough  to  anticipate  this  consequence, 
and  prepare  the  way  for  it. 

Independently  of  such  a  plot,  the  paltry  game  of  these  representations 
is  sufficiently  intelhgible.  It  seeks  to  place  the  King's  Government  in 
a  dilemma.  Either  they  enforce  restriction  in  the  supposed  interest  of 
religion,  or  they  decline  to  enforce  it.  In  the  first  case,  they  diminish 
the  liberties  of  tlie  people,  and  provoke  discontent ;  in  the  second,  they 
afford  fresh  proof  of  ungodliness,  and  fresh  matter  of  complaint  to  be 
turned  sedulously  to  account  by  the  political  piety  of  the  Vatican. 
But  let  us  pass  on  from  this  small  trickery ;  jpaullo  majora  canamics. 

Considering,  on  the  one  hand,  the  professedly  pacific  and  unworldly 
character  of  the  successors  of  the  '  Fisherman,'  -and  on  the  other  the 
gravity  of  those  moral  and  social  evils  which  are  indeed  represented  as 
insupportable  (ii.  54),  an  unbiased  reader  would  expect  to  find  in  these 
pages  constant  indications  of  a  desire  on  the  part  of  tlie  Pope  and 
Court  of  Pome  to  effect,  by  the  surrender  of  extreme  claims,  some  at 
least  tolerable  adjustment.  There  was  a  time,  within  the  memory  of 
the  last  twenty  years,  when  Pius  IX.  might  have  become  the  head  of 
an  Italian  Federation.  When  that  had  passed,  there  was  again  a  time 
at  which  he  might  have  retained,  under  a  European  guarantee,  the 
siizerainete,  as  distinguished  from  the  direct  monarchy,  of  the  entire 
States  of  the  Church.  When  this,  too,  had  been  let  slip,  and  after  an- 
other contraction  of  the  circle  of  possibilities,  it  was  still  probably  open 
to  him  to  retain  the  siizerainete  of  the  city  of  Pome  itself,  with  free 


i^^^CAUFO^Si^      SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

access  to  the  sea ;  it  was  unquestionably  within  his  clioice,  at  any  period 
down  to  1870,  to  stipulate  for  the  Leonine  City,  with  a  like  guaranteed 
liberty  of  access,  and  witli  a  permanent  engagement  that  Home  never 
should  become  the  seat  of  government  or  of  Koyal  residence,  so  that 
there  should  not  be  two  suns  in  one  firmament.  There  was,  in  truth, 
nothing  which  the  Pope  might  not  have  had  assured  to  him,  by  every 
warranty  that  the  friendliness  of  all  Europe  could  command,  except 
the  luxury  of  forcing  on  the  people  of  the  Eoman  States  a  clerical 
government  w^hich  they  detested.  The  Pope  preferred  the  game  of 
*  double  or  quits.'     And  he  now  beholds  and  experiences  the  result. 

Put,  notwithstanding  what  he  sees  and  feels,  that  game  is  too  fasci- 
nating to  be  abandoned.  Instead  of  opening  the  door  to  friendly  com- 
promise, this  is  the  very  thing  for  the  treatment  of  which  the  furnace 
of  his  wrath  is  ever  seven  times  heated.  '  Yes,  my  sons,'  he  says  in  a 
'stupendous'  (i.  268)  discourse,  and  himself  'resplendent  with  a  gran- 
deur more  than  human'  (269), to  an  '  innumerable  multitude  of  the  faith- 
ful, Eoman  and  foreign'  (266),  whom  he  has  already  congratulated  (283) 
on  their  readiness  to  give  all,  even  their  blood,  for  him — '  Yes,  my  sons, 
draw  into  ever  closer  union,  nor  be  arrested  even  for  a  moment  by  ly- 
ing reports  of  an  impossible  "  reconciliation."  It  is  futile  to  talk  of 
reconciliation.  The  Church  can  never  be  reconciled  with  error,  and 
the  Pope  can  not  separate  himself  from  the  Church.  .  .  .  Ko ;  no 
reconciliation  can  ever  be  possible  between  Christ  and  Eelial,  between 
light  and  darkness,  between  truth  and  falsehood,  between  justice  and 
the  usurpation.'  ■    : 

This  passage,  by  no  means  isolated,  is,  it  must  be  admitted,  rather 
'  superhuman.'  The  wrath  of  the  aged  Pontiff  had,  in  fact,  been  stirred 
in  a  special  way  by  some  abbominevoli  hnmagini^  some  execrable 

*  Even  from  the  heart  of  the  Order  of  Jesuits  there  sounds  a  voice  of  protestation  against 
the  insane  policy  of  the  Pope:  it  is  that  of  Curci,  a  well-known  champion,  for  many  long 
years,  of  the  Papal  cause  against  Gioberti  arid  others.  We  learn  from  a  pamphlet  published 
on  the  part  of  the  Italian  Government,  in  reply  to  a  violent  and  loosely  written  attack  by  the 
Bishop  of  Orleans  (on  the  merits  of  which,  in  other  respects,  we  are  not  in  a  condition  fully 
to  pronounce),  that  Padre  Curci  says  it  is  idle  to  mako  a  bugbear  of  conciliation ;  that  much 
as  he  laments  the  departure  of  the  mediaeval  ways  (which  perhaps  he  does  not  quite  under- 
stand), they  are  gone ;  it  is  idle  to  suppose  the  past  can  be  re-established  in  the  Koman 
States,  either  by  diplomatic  mediation,  political  rearrangement,  'or  even  foreign  intervention.' 
— Les  Rois  Ecclesiastiques  de  V Italic  (Paris,  1874),  p.  74.  It  seems,  then,  that  there  is  at 
least  one  way  in  which  a  Jesuit  can  forfeit  his  title  to  be  heard  at  Rome,  and  that  is  if  he 
speaks  good-sense. 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  31 

pictures,  wliicli  were  for  him  most  profane.  The  editor  explains  to  us 
what  they  were.  Sucli  is  the  unheard-of  audacity  of  Italian  Liberal- 
ism, and  such  its  hatred  and  persecution  of  the  Pope,  that  (ii.  285)  a 
certain  Yerzaschi,  living  in  the  Corso  No.  135,  had  for  several  days  ex- 
hibited to  public  view  a  picture  in  which  the  Pope  and  the  King  of 
Italy  were — we  tremble  as  we  write — embracing  one  another ! 

But  if  the  Holy  Father  is  thus  decisive  on  the  subject  of  visible  rep- 
resentations which  he  conceives  to  be  profane,  we  should  greatly  value 
his  judgment,  were  tliere  an  opportunity  of  obtaining  it,  on  another 
commodity  of  the  same  class,  an  Italian  work,  sold  in  Rome,  and  not  a 
production  of  the  hated  Liberals.  It  is  stamped  'Diritto  di  propriety 
di  Cleofe  Ferrari,' with  an  address  in  Rome,  of  which  the  particulars 
can  not  be  clearly  deciphered,  but  it  is  manifestly  authentic. 

It  is  a  photograph  of  6i  by  4J  inches,  and  it  represents  a  double 
scene — one  in  the  heavens  above,  one  on  the  earth  below.  Above,  and 
receding  from  the  foreground,  is  one  of  those  figures  of  the  Eternal 
Father  which  we  in  England  view  with  repugnance;  but  that  is  not 
the  point.  On  the  right  hand  of  that  figure  stands,  towards  the  fore- 
ground, the  Blessed  Virgin  JVTary,  with  the  moon  under  her  feet  (Rev. 
xii.  1) ;  on  the  left  hand,  and  also  towards  the  front,  is  Saint  Peter, 
kneeling  on  one  knee ;  but  kneeling  to  the  Virgin,  not  to  God.  In  the 
scene  below  we  have  an  elevated  pedestal,  with  a  group  of  figures  nearer 
the  eye  and  filling  the  foreground.  On  the  pedestal  is  Pope  Pius  IX., 
in  a  sitting  posture,  with  his  hands  clasped,  his  crown,  the  Triregno,  on 
his  head,  and  a  stream  of  light  falling  upon  him  from  a  dove  forming 
part  of  the  upper  combination,  and  representing  of  course  the  Holy 
Spirit.  The  Pope's  head  is  not  turned  towards  the  figure  of  the  Al- 
mighty. Round  the  pedestal  are  four  kneeling  figures,  apparently 
representing  the  four  great  quarters  of  the  globe,  whose  corporal  adora- 
tion is  visibly  directed  towards  the  Pontiff,  and  not  towards  the  opened 
heaven.  We  omit  some  other  details  not  so  easily  understood ;  and, 
indeed,  the  reader  will  by  this  time  have  had  a  sickening  sufliciency 
of  this  sort  of  'abominable  images.'  We  commend  this  most  profane 
piece  of  adulation  to  the  notice  of  the  Cardinal  Vicar,  as  it  will  supply 
him  with  a  very  valuable  topic  in  his  next  demand  upon  the  Italian 
Government  to  prevent  the  public  exhibition  in  Rome  of  what  conveys 
an  insult  to  religion. 


32  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

The  outburst  we  have  quoted  against  all  reconciliation  is,  as  we  have 
said,  not  an  isolated  one.  Declarations  essentially  similar  may  be 
found  in  vol.  i.  291  (Dec.  7, 1871),  498  (Letter  to  Cardinal  Antonelli) ; 
ii.  279  (March  7, 1873,  in  an  address  of  Bishops,  accepted  and  lauded 
by  the  Pope). 

Out  of  these  two  hundred  and  ninety  Speeches,  about  two  hundred 
and  eighty  seem  to  be  addressed  to  the  great  political  purpose  which  is 
now  the  main  aim  of  all  Papal  effort — that  of  the  triumph  and  libera- 
tion of  the  Church  in  Rome  itself,  and  the  re-establishment  of  peace. 

When  the  Pope  speaks  of  the  liberation  of  the  Church,  he  means 
merely  this,  that  it  is  to  set  its  foot  on  the  neck  of  every  other  power ; 
and  when  he  speaks  of  peace  in  Italy,  he  means  the  overthrow  of  the 
established  order — if  by  a  reconversion  of  Italians  to  his  way  of  think- 
ing, well;  but^f  not,  then  by  tlie  old  and  favorite  Poman  expedient, 
the  introduction  of  foreign  arms,  invading  the  land  to  put  dowm  the 
national  sentiment  and  to  re-establish  the  temporal  government  of  the 
clerical  order. 

Every  where,  when  he  refers  to  the  times  which  preceded  the  an- 
nexations to  Sardinia,  and  the  eventual  establishment  of  the  Italian 
Kingdom,  he  represents  them  as  the  happy  period  of  wdiich  every  good 
man  should  desire  the  return.  Even  at  the  moderate  suggestions  of 
practical  reform  which  were  recommended  to  Gregory  XYI.  in  the 
early  part  of  his  reign  by  the  Five  Great  Powers,  including  the  Austria 
of  Metternich,  he  scoffs;  and  he  appears  to  think  that  they  brought 
down  upon  several  of  the  recommending  Sovereigns  the  judgment  due 
to  impiety. 

Thus,  on  June  21, 1873,  he  says  (ii.  356):  /Let  ns  pray  for  all;  let 
us  pray  for  Italy,  that  w^e  may  see  her  set  free  from  her  enemies,  and 
restored  to  her  former  repose  and  tranquillity.' 

Now  there  can  be  no  doubt  what  he  means  by  calm  and  tranquil- 
lity. He  explains  it  in  a  passage  when  he  has  occasion  to  refer  to 
the  opening  times  and  scenes  of  his  ill-omened  and  ill-ordered  reign : 
*  Those  times  were  troublous,  just  as  are  the  present ;  but  notwithstand- 
ing they  produced,  after  no  long  while,  an  era  of  tranquillity  and 
quietude '  (ii.  23). 

The  troubles,  for  troubles  there  were,  arose  from  the  efforts  of  a  peo- 
ple, then  without  political  experience,  to  right  themselves  under  the  un- 


SPEECHES  OF  TOPE  PIUS  IX.  .33 

skillful  handling  of  a  ruler, who  prompted  movements  he  had  no  strength 
to  control,  and  made  promises  he  had  no  ability  to  perform.  The  tran- 
quillity and  quietude  were  found  in  the  invasion  of  the  State  by  a 
French  army ;  in  the  siege  and  capture  of  the  city,  which  its  inhabit- 
ants and  a  few  Italian  sympathizers  in  vain  struggled  nnder  Garibaldi 
to  defend ;  and  in  an  armed  occupation  which  effectually  kept  down 
the  people  for  seventeen  and  a  half  years;  until  there  came,  in  1866,  a 
winter's  morning,  when  at  four  o'clock  the  writer  of  these  pages,  by 
help  of  the  struggling  gas-lights  in  the  gloom,  saw  the  picked  regi- 
ments of  France  wheel  round  the  street  corners  of  the  queenly  city,  in 
their  admirable  marching  trim,  on  the  way  to  the  railway  station,  and 
bethought  him  that  in  that  evacuation  there  lay  the  seed  of  great 
events. 

To  those  who  have  not  carefully  followed  the  fortunes  of  Italy  and 
her  rulers,  it  may  seem  strange  that  this  last  and  worst  extreme  of 
tyranny,  the  maintenance  of  a  Government,  and  that  a  clerical  Govern- 
ment, by  bayonets,  and  those  foreign  bayonets,  should  be  spoken  of  by 
any  man  in  his  five  senses,  even  though  that  man  be  a  Pope,  in  any 
other  terms  than  those  of  pain  and  shame,  even  if  it  were  at  the  same 
time,  as  a  supposed  necessity,  palliated  or  defended.  But  the  Pope 
speaks  of  it  wdth  a  coolness,  an  exultation  (ii.  248),  a  yearning  self- 
complacent  desire,  which  would  deserve  no  other  name  but  that  of  a 
brutal  inhumanity,  were  it  not  that  he  simply  gives  ntterance  to  the  in- 
veterate tradition  of  the  Roman  (Juria^  and  the  tradition  of  a  political 
party  in  Italy,  which,  as  long  as  it  had  power,  made  foreign  occupation 
an  every-day  occurrence,  a  standing  remedy,  a  normal  state. 

In  1815,  the  Pope  was  brought  back  to  Rome  by  foreign  arms.  But 
at  that  time  it  was  by  foreign  arms  that  .he  had  been  kept  out  of  his 
dominions.  Cardinal  Pacca,  in  his  Mejnoirs,  gives  ns  to  understand 
that  the  Pontiff  was  received  by  the  people  with  their  good  will.  It 
may  have  been  so.  But  unhappily,  after  the  great  occasion  of  this 
restoration,  all  the  mischief  was  done.  Much  of  local  self-government 
had  existed  in  the  Pontifical  ^States  before  the  French  Revolution. 
It  was  now  put  down.  Of  the  French  institutions  and  methods  the 
Pope  retained  only  the  worst — the  spirit  of  centralization,  and  a  po- 
lice, kept  not  to  repress  crime,  but  to  ferret  out  and  proscribe  the 
spirit  of  liberty.    The  high  sacerdotal  party  prevailed  over  the  moderate 

C 


34  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

counsels  of  Gonsalvi.     And  Farini,  in  his  dispassionate  History,  gives 
the  following  account  of  the  state  of  things  even  under  Pius  YII. : 

'  There  was  no  care  for  the  cultivation  of  the  people,  no  anxiety  for  public  prosperity. 
Uome  was  a  cesspool  of  corruption,  of  exemptions,  and  of  privileges :  a  clergy,  made  up  of 
fools  and  knaves,  in  power ;  the  laity  slaves  ;  the  treasury  plundered  by  gangs  of  tax-farmers 
and  spies  ;  all  the  business  of  government  consisted  in  prying  into  and  punishing  the  notions, 
the  expectations,  and  the  imprudences  of  the  Liberals.'* 

The  result  was  that,  as  the  ±'ope's  native  army  w^as  then  worthless 
and  even  ridiculous,  and  his  foreign  mercenaries  insufficient  in  strength, 
the  country  was  always  either  actually  or  virtually  occupied  by  Aus- 
trian forces :  virtually  w^lien  not  actually,  because  at  those  periods 
when  the  force  had  been  withdrawn,  it  was  ready,  on  the  first  signal 
of  popular  movement  and  Papal  distress,  to  return.  So. we  pass  over 
the  interval  until  the  accession  of  Pius  IX.,  and  until  the  month  of 
July,  1849.  Then  the  Government  of  France,  acting  as  we  believe 
without  the  sanction  of  the  public  judgment,  and  in  order  to  reward 
for  the  past  and  purchase  for  the  future  the  electoral  support  of  the 
Ultramontane  party,  assumed  the  succession  to  Austria  in  the  dis- 
charge of  her  odious  office  of  repression,  and  thus  left  it  doubtful  to 
the  last  wdiether  her  splendid  services  to  Italy  in  1859  were  or  were 
not  outweighed  by  the  cruel  wrong  done  for  so  many  years  in  the  vio- 
lent occupation  of  liome.  That  offiee  has  long  ago  been  finally  and 
in  good  faith  renounced  by  Austria,  now  the  friend  of  Italy.  Let  us 
hope,  for  the  sake  of  the  peace  of  Europe,  tJiat  it  will  never  again  be 
assumed  by  any  other  Power.  It  was,  hcAvever,  only  the  war  of  1870 
which  caused  the  removal  of  the  French  force  from  Civita  Yecchia. 
That  seaport  had  been  re-occupied  shortly  after  the  relinquishment  of 
Pome  in  1869.  In  July,  1870,  the  remonstrances  of  the  Papal  Govern- 
ment were  met  by  a  neat  and  telling  reply  from  France.  *  The  for- 
tunes of  the  war  will  be  favorable,  or  they  will  be  adverse.  If  the 
former,  we  can  then  protect  you  better  than  ever ;  if  the  latter,  we 
must  surely  have  our  men  to  protect  ourselves.' 

Sad,  then,  as  it  is,  and  scarcely  credible  as  it  may  appear,  that  this 
great  officer  of  religion,  who  guides  a  moiety  or  thereabouts  of  Chris- 
tendom, who 

'Looks  from  his  throne  of  clouds  o'er  half  the  world,'  ^ 

»  Farini,  Hist,  of  Home,  bk.  i.  ch.  i. ;  English  translation,  vol.  i.  p.  17. 
'  Campbell's  Pleasures  of  Hope. 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  35 

is  liopelessly  implicated  in  the  double  error :.  firsi;,  that  he  makes  the 
restoration  of  his  temporal  power  a  matter  of  religions  duty  and  ne- 
cessity; secondly,  that  he  seeks  the  accomplishment  of  that  bacrend 
through  the  outrage  of  a  foreign  intervention  against  the  people  of 
Rome,  and  through  the  breaking  up  of  the  great  Italian  Kingdom. 

For,  indeed,  it  is  plain  enough  that  the  assaults  of  the  Pope^  though 
especially  directed  against  that  portion  of  Italy  which  once. formed  the 
States  of  the  Church,  are  by  no  means  confined  to  such  a  narrow  range. 
This  approved  work  describes  the  Italian  Royal  Family,  at  the  epoch 
of  the  occupation  of  Rome,  as  the  Principi  di  Piemonte  (i.  58);  and 
the  Pope  assures  a  deputation  from  Naples  that  in  his  daily  prayer  he 
remembers  the  city,  its  people,  its  pastor,  and'  its  king — meaning  the 
ex-king  Francis  II.  (i.  118).  What  he  prays  is  that  the  longed-for  peace 
may  be  restored  to  that '  kingdom.'  And  in  order  that  we  may  know 
what  this  peace  is,  another  speech  at  a  later  date  tells  us  he  prays  the 
Lord  that  that  unfortunate  kingdom  may  return  to  be  that  which  it 
was  formerly,  namely,  a  kingdom  of  peace  and  prosperity  (ii.  338). 
This  is  the  language  in  which  the  Pope:  is  not  ashamed  to  speak  of  a 
Government  founded  upon  the  most  gross  and  abominable  perjury, 
cruel  and  base  in  all  its  detail  to  tlie  last  degree,  and  so  lost  in  the 
estimation  of  the  people,  notwithstanding  the  existence  of  its  powerful 
army,  that  Garibaldi  was  able  in  a  red  shirt  to  traverse  the  country  as 
a  conqueror,  enter  the  capital,  and  take  peaceable  possession  of  the 
helm  of  State. 

The  kingdoms  and  states  of  the  world  are,  in  Romish  estimation, 
divided  into  several  classes.  Let  us  put  Italy  alone  in  the  first  and 
lowest,  as  a  State  with  which  the  Pope  is  undisguisedly  at  war.  Next 
come  the  States  which  pursue  a  policy  adverse  to  the  Ultramontane 
system;  after  them,  in  the  upward  series,  those  not  very  numerous 
States  with  whiclx  Rome  has  no  quarrels ;  ijext  those  from  which  it  re- 
ceives active  adhesion  or  support.  And  at  the  head  of  all  comes  the 
Pope's  own  vanished  possession,  now  represented  in  his  imaginary 
title  to  the  States  of  the  Church.  For  whereas  tlie  others  rule  by  a.  jus 
Aumanum,  he  ruled  by  a  jus  divirium  ;  and  what  is  mere  revolt  or 
treason  or  rapine  elsewhere,  has  in  the  Roman  States  the  added  guilt 
of  sacrilege.  And,  indeed,  as  to  revolt  or  rapine,  the  Pope  treats  them 
lightly  enough.     Nothing  can  be  more  curious  in  this  respect  than  his 


30  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

references  to  Germany.  The  territory  of  tlie  German  Emperor  was 
made  up  by  acquisitions  yet  more  recent  than  those  which  set  np  the 
Italian  Kingdom,  such  as  it  existed  before  the  war  of  1870;  and  by  a 
like  process  of  putting  down  divers  Governments  which  were  in  the 
Eoman  sense  legitimate,  and  of  absorbing  their  dominions.  But  the 
Pope  boasts  that  he  had  not  been  at  all  squeamish  on  this  score  (i.  457), 
for  he  had  announced  to  Prince  Bismarck  that  tlie  *  Catholics'  had 
been  in  favor  of  the  German  Empire.  When,  however,  the  policy  of 
that  Empire, was  developed  in  a  sense  adverse  to  the  Roman  views, 
very  different  ideas  as  to  its  basis  came  into  vogue;  and  the  Pope's  au- 
thorized editor  denounces  it  as  the  embodied  Paganism  of  Prussia, 
boldly  predicts  its  early  fall  (ii.  135,  Comp.  Q6\  and,  speaking  of  the 
meeting  of  the  three  great  potentates  on  a  recent  occasion,  calls  them 
the  Em'peror  of  Austria,  the  Emperor  of  Russia,  and  *  the  new  one 
called  of  Germany'  (^7  nxiovo  detto  di  Germania))  which,  by  the  way, 
he  is  not,  for  his  title  is,  Ave  believe,  the  German  Emperor.  In  truth 
it  seems  that  the  legitimacy  of  every  Government  is  measured  by  the 
single  rule  of  its  propensity  to  favor  the  policy  of  Rome.  And  while 
other  Governments  generally  are  here  and  there  admonished,  even 
when  they  are  guilty  of  no  sin  of  commission,  as  to  the  neglect  of 
their  duty  to  restore  the  Pope  (i.  113),  there  is  one  which  receives  his 
warmest  commendations.  It  is  the  'glorious'  Republic  of  the  Equator, 
which,  'amid  the  complicity,  by  silence,  of  the  Powers  of  Europe,'  sent 
its  •  poor,  feeble  bark  (we  mean  its  vocal  bark,  probably  it  possesses  no 
other)  across  the  Atlantic  to  proclaim— 

'Auditum  admissi  risura  teneatis,  amici?' — 

the  principle  of  the  restoration,  by  foreign  arms,  of  the  Papal  throne. 

In  his  desire  for  the  realization  of  this  happy  dream,  the  Pope  ap- 
pears to  be  wound  up  -to  a  sensitive  irritability  of  expectation,  and  ac- 
cordingly prophecy  is  liberally  scattered  over  the  pages ,  of  these  vol- 
umes. Sometimes  he  does  not  know  when  it  will  be ;  sometimes  it  can 
not  be  long ;  sometimes  he  sees  the  very  dawning  of  the  happy  day. 
These  varying  states  of  view  belong,  indeed,  to  the  origin  of  what  is 
called  pious  opinion,  but  to  believe  that  the  day  will  come  is  a  matter 
of  duty  and  faith. 

'  Yes,  this  change — yes,  this  triumph,  will  have  to  come ;  and  it  is  matter  of  faith  (ed  e  di 
fede).    I  know  not  if  it  will  come  in  my  lifetime,  the  lifetime  of  this  poor  Vicar  of  Jesus 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  37 

Christ.     I  know  that  come  it  will.     The  rising  again  must  take  plaCe — this  great  impiety 
must  end '  (ii.  82). 

It  is  with  glee  that  he  inculcates  the  great  duty  of  prajer,  when  a 
hopeful  sign  comes  up  on  the  far  horizon :  though  that  sign  be  no 
more  than  some  notice  given  in  tlie  Chamber  of  France.  On  February 
18, 1872, he  says: 

'At  the  earliest  moment,  offer  prayer  and  sacrifice  to  .God  for  another  special  object. 
About  this  time  my  affairs  are  to  be  the  subject  of  discussion  in  the  National  Assembly  of  a 
great  people ;  and  there  are  those  who  will  take  my  part.  Let  us,  then,  pray  for  this  As- 
sembly.' 

And  so  forth  (i.  352). 

Taken  by  itself,  a  passage  of  this  kind  might  be  perfectly  w^ell  un- 
derstood as  contemplating  nothing  beyond  the  limits  of  a  simply  diplo- 
matic and  even  amicable  intervention.  But  then  the  question  arises, 
why,  if  diplomacy  be  in  contemplation,  are  compromises  and  adjust- 
ments so  passionately  denounced  1  The  answer  is,  that  diplomacy  is 
not  in  contemplation  or  in  desire,  but  what  is  now  perfectly  well  known 
in  Europe  as  'blood  and  iron.'  No  careful  reader  of  this  authoritative 
book  can  doubt  that  these  are  the  means  by  which  the  great  Christian 
Pastor  contemplates  and  asks— aye,' asks  as  one  w^ho  thinks  himself  en- 
titled to  command — the  re-establishment  of  his  power  in  Rome.  There 
is  indeed  a  passage  in  which  he,  addressing  his  ex-policemen !  depre- 
cates an  armed  reaction,  and  declares  the  imputation  to  be  a  calumny. 
And  so  far  as  the  gallantry  of  those  policemen  is  concerned,  according 
to  all  that  used  to  be  seen  or  heard  of  them,  he  is  quite  right.  The  re- 
action he  desires,  in  this  speech,  is  good  education,  respect  to  the  Church 
and  the  priests.  But  this  is  the  local  reaction,  the  reaction  in  piccolo. 
'  As  to  what  remains,  God  will  do  as  He  w^ills :  reactions  on  the  great 
scale  {reazioni  in  grande)  can  not  be  in  my  hands,  but  are  in  His,  on 
whom  all  depends.' 

He  shows,  however,  elsewhere  and  habitually,  not  only  a  great  activ- 
ity in  seconding  the  designs  of  Providence  in  this  matter,  but  a  con- 
siderable disposition  to  take  the  initiative,  if  only  he  could.  In  words 
alone,  it  is  true ;  but  he  has  no  powder  other  than  of  words.  Let  us 
hear  him  address  his  soldiers,  on  the  27th  of  December,  1872  (ii.  141) : 

'You,  soldiers  of  honor,  attached  by  affection  to  this  Holy  See,  constant  in  the  discharge 
of  your  duties,  come  before  me ;  but  you  still  come  unarmed,  thus  proving  how  evil  are  the 
times. 


38  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

*  Oh,  were  I  but  able  to  conform  to  that  voice  of  God  which  so  many  ages  back  cried  to  a 
people,  "Turn  your  spades,  turn  your  plowshares  and  your  plows,  turn  all  your  instruments 
of  husbandry  into  blades  and  into  swords,  turn  them  into  weapons  of  war,  for  your  enemies 
approach,  and  for  many  arms,  and  many  men  with  arms,  will  there  be  need."  Would  that 
the  blessed  God  would  to-day  in  us  repeat  these  very  inspirations !  But  He  is' silent ;  and  I, 
his  Vicar,  can  not  be  otherwise— can  not  employ  any  means  but  silence.' 

Here  we  should  certainly,  with  these  volumes  of  loud  speech  before 
us,  desire  to  interpolate  a  skeptical  note  of  interrogation.  lie  proceeds, 
however,  to  say  it  is  not  for  him  to  give  authority  for  the  manufacture 
of  weapons ;  and  that  probably  the  revolution  in  Italy  wall  destroy  it- 
self. But  if  that  be  his  idea,  why  the  ferocious  passage  about  blades 
and  swords  which  has  just  been  presented  to  the  reader,  and  the  many 
references  to  forcible  restoration  in  which  he  delights  ?  It  is  probable 
that  the  Pontiff  relents  occasionally,  and  gives  scope  to  his  better  mind; 
but  habitually,  and  as  a  rule,  he  looks  forward  with  eagerness  to  that 
restoration  by  foreign  arms  in  the  future,  which  forms  to  him,  as  we 
have  seen,  so  satisfactory  a  subject  of  retrospective  contemplation  for 
the  period  from  1849  to  1866,  and  again  from  1867  to  1870. 

Many  may  desire  to  know,  in  concluding  this  examination,  what  are 
the  utterances  of  the  Pontiff  with  respect  to  the  burning  questions  of 
the  Vatican  Decrees.  It  must  be  at  Rome  that  the  fashions  are  set  in 
regard  to  infallibility,  to  obedience,  and  to  the  question  of  the  relation 
between  the  Roman  See  and  the  Civil  Power;  and  the  work  under 
review  is  perfectly  unequivocal  on  this  class  of  subjects,  though  less 
copious  than,  in  regard  to  that  cardinal  object  of  Papal  desire,  the  res- 
toration of  the  Temporal  Power. 

In  times  of  comparative  moderation,  not  yet  forty-five  years  back, 
when  Montalembert  and  Lamennais  dutifully  repaired  to  Rome  te  seek 
guidance  from  Gregory  XYI.,  that  Pontiff,  in  repudiating  their  projects 
through  his  Minister,  paid  them  a  compliment  for  asking  orders  from 
'  the  infallible  mouth  of  the  Successor  of  Peter.'  We  are  often  told 
that  the  Pope  can  not  be  held  to  speak  ex  cathedra  unless  he  addresses 
the  whole  body  of  Christians,  whereas  in  this  case  he  addressed  only 
two.  Now  to  the  outer  world,  who  try  these  matters  by  the  ordinary 
rules  of  the  human  understanding,  it  seems  to  be  a  very  grave  incon- 
venience that  the  possessor  of  an  admitted  Infallibility  should  formally 
declare  himself  infallible  in  cases  where  he  is  allowed  in  his  own  title- 
deeds  to  be  only  fallible  like  the  rest  of  us.     One  chief  mark,  however, 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  39 

of  declarations  ex  cathedra  is  that  they  are  made  to  all  the  Faithful ; 
and  we  observe  in  the  title  of  these  Discourses  that  they  are  addressed 
*Ai  Fedeli  di  Boma  e  deW  Orbe. 

In  the  work  of  Don  Pasquale,  the  term  *  infallible'  is  very  fre- 
quently applied  to  the  Pope  by  the  deputations.  A  crowd  of  three 
thousand  persons. shouts  Viva  il  Pontefice  Infallibile  (i.  372,  comp.  i. 
407) ;  a  lawyer,  speaking  for  a  company  of  lawyers  (ii.  313),  reveres 
*  the  great  Pope,  the  superlatively  great  King,  the  infallible  master  of 
his  faith,  the  most  loving  father  of  his  soul;'  and  the  like  strain  pre- 
vails elsewhere  {e.  g.  ii.  160,  165,  177,  190,  256)  in  these  Addresses, 
which  are  always  received  with  approval.  Whether  advisedly  or  not, 
the  Pontiff  does  not  (except  once,  i.  204)  apply  the  term  to  himself ; 
but  is  in  other  places  content  with  alleging  his  superiority  (as  has  been 
shown  above)  to  an  inspired  Prophet,  and  with  commending  those  who 
come  to  hear  his  words  as  words  proceeding  from  Jesus  Christ  (i.  335). 

On  the  matter  of  Obedience  he  is  perfectly  nnequivocal.  To  the 
Armenians,  who  have  recently  resisted  his  absorbing  in  himself  th,e 
'nationalprxvileges  of  their  Church,  he  explains  (ii.  435)  that  to  him,  as 
the  Successor  of  Saint  Peter,  and  to  him  alone,  is  comn^itted  by  Divine 
right  the  Pastorate  of  the  entire-  Church ;  plainly  there  is  no  other  real 
successor  of  the  Apostles,  for  Bishops,  he  says,  have  their  dioceses,  it  is 
true,  but  only  by  a  title  ecclesiastical,  not  Divine.  To  limit  this  power 
is  heresy,  and  has  ever  been  so.  IsTot  less  plain  is  his  sense  of  his  su- 
premacy over  the  powers  of  the  w^orld.  His  title  and  place  are  to  be 
the  Supreme  Judge  of  Christendom  (i.  204).  It  is  not  the  office  of 
any  Government,  but  the  sublime  mission  of  the  Roman  Pontificate,  to 
assume  the  defense  of  the  independence  of  States  (ii.  498) ;  and  so  far 
from  granting  to  nations  and  races  any  power  over  the  Church,  God 
enjoined  upon  them  the  duty  of  believing,  and  gave  them  over  to  be 
taught  1}y  the  Apostles  (ii.  452). 

Pinally,  as  respects  the  Syllabus  and  its  mischievous  contents,  that 
document  is  not  only  upheld,  but  upheld  as  the  great  or  only  hope  of 
Christian  societ3\  We  hear  (i.  444)  of  .the  advantage  secured  by  the 
publication  of  the  Syllabus.  The  Chair  of  Peter  has  been  teaching, 
enlightening,  and  governing  from  thfe  foundation  of  the  Church  down 
to  the  Syllabus  and  the  Decrees  of  the  Vatican  (ii.  427,  his).  The  two 
are  manifestly  placed  on  a  level.     And,  grieved  as  is  the  Pontiff  at  the 


40  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

present  perversion  of  mankind,  and  especially  of  the  yonng,  he  is  also 
(convinced  that  the  world  must  come  to  embrace  the  Syllabus,  which  is 
the  only  anchor  of  its  salvation  iVimica  ancora  di  salute,  i.  58,  69). 

One  of  the  main  objects  of  the  Syllabus  is  to  re-establish  in  the 
mass  all  the  most  extravagant  claims  which  have  at  any  time  been 
lodged  by  the  Church  of  Rome  against  the  Christian  State.  Hardly 
any  greater  outrage  on  society,  in  our  judgment,  has  ever  been  com- 
mitted than  by  Pope  Pius  IX.  in  certain  declarations  (i.  193,  and  else- 
where) respecting  persons  married  civilly  without  the  Sacrament.  For, 
in  condemning  them  as  guilty  of  concubinage,  he  releases  them  from 
the  reciprocal  obligations  of  man  and  wife.  But  of  all  those  which 
we  have  described  as  the  burning  questions,  the  most  familiar  to  En- 
glishmen is,  perhaps,  that  of  the  Deposing  Power;  which,  half  a 
century  ago,  we  were  assured  was  dead  and  buried,  and  long  past  the 
possibility  of  exhumation  or  revival.  It  shall  now  supply  us  with  our 
last  illustration ;  for  true  as  it  is  that,  with  reference  to  the  possibilities 
of  life  and  action,  it  remains  the  shadow  of  a  shade,  yet  we  have 
lived  into  a  time  when  it  is  deliberately  taught  by  the  Ultramontane 
party  generally,  and  not,  so  far  as  we  know,  disavowed  by  iiny  of 
them. 

Lord  Robert  Montagu,  who  was  in  the  last  Parliament  the  High 
Church  and  Tory  Member  for  the  orthodox  county  of  Huntingdon,  and 
is  in  this  Parliament  transformed  into  an  ardent  neophyte  and  cham- 
pion of  the  Papal  Church,  in  a  recent  Lecture  before  the  Catholic 
Union  of  Ireland,^  took  occasion,  among  other  extravagances,  to  set 
forth  with  all  honor  a  passage  from  a  Speech  of  the  Pope,  delivered 
on  the  21st  of  July,  1871,  in  which  he  justified  and  explained  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Deposing  Power.  According  to  the  version  he  gave  of  the 
Italian  Discourse,  this  Power  was  an  ^authority,  in  accordance  with 
public  right,  which  was  then  vigorous,  and  with  the  acquiescence  of  all 
Christian  nations.' 

In  the  Tablet  newspaper  of  November  21  and  December  5, 1874, 
a  writer,  who  signs  himself  C.  S.  D.,  assails  Lord  Robert  Montagu  for 
erroneous  translation  ;  and,  with  undeniable  justice,  points  out  that  the 
words  secondo  il  diritto  puhhlico* allora  vigente  do  not  mean  '  in  ac- 

>  Dublin  :  M'Glashan  and  Gill,  1874,  p.  10. 


SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX.  41 

cordance  with  public  right,  which  was  then  vigorous/  but  *in  accord- 
ance with  the  public  law '  (or  right)  *  then  in  force.'  He  also  quotes 
words  not  quoted  by  Lord  Eobert,  to  show  that  the  Popes  exercised 
tins  power  at  the  call  of  the  Christian  nations  {chiamati  dal  voto  dei 
jpojpoli) ;  which,  as  he  truly  says,  gives  a  very  different  color  to  the  pas- 
sage. His  citation  is,  he  states,  from  the  Voce  delta  Verita  of  22d  July, 
1871,  the  day  following  the  Speech,  confirmed  by  the  Civiltd  Cattolica 
of  August  19. 

Amid  these  grave  discrepancies  of  high  authorities,  our  readers 
may  desire  to  know  what  a  still  higher  authority,  the  Pope  himself, 
really  did  say;  and  we  have,  happily,  the  means  of  informing  them 
from  the  volumes  before  us,  which  contain  the  '  sole  authentic '  report. 
The  Speech  was  delivered,  not  on  the  21st,  but  on  the  20th  of  July,  and 
will  be  found  at  vol.  i.  p.  203.  We  need  not  trouble  the  reader  with  a 
lengthened  citation.  The  passage,  as  quoted  by  Lord  Kobert  Montagu, 
wdll  be  found  in  Mr.  Gladstone's  '  Vatican  Decrees,'  p.  19.  The  essen- 
tial point  is  that,  according  to  C.  S.  D.,  the  Pope  justified  the  Deposing 
Power  on  this  specific  ground,  that  they  were  called  to  exercise  it  by 
the  desire,  or  voice,  or  demand,  of  the  nations.  What  will  our  readers 
say  when  we  acquaint  them  that  the  passage  given  by  C.  S.  D.  in  the 
Tablet  is  before  our  eyes  as  we  write,  and  that  the  words  '  called  by 
the  voice  of  the  people'  {chiaraata  dal  voto  dei jpojpoli)  are  not  in  it? 
Whether  they  were  spoken  or  not  is  another  question,  which  we  can  not 
decide.  What  is  material  is  that  from  the  fixed,  deliberate,  and  only 
authentic  report  they  have  been  excluded,  and  that  the  Pope  himself 
sustains,  and  therefore  claims,  the  Deposing  Power,  not  on  the  ground 
of  any  demand  of  the  public  opinion  of  the  day,  but  as  attaching  to  his 
ofiice. 

And  now,  in  bidding  farewell  to  Don  Pasquale,  we  offer  him  our 
best  thanks  for  his  t\\;o  volumes.  Probably  this  acknowledgment  may 
never  meet  his  eyes.  But  lest,  in  the  case  of  its  reaching  him,  it  should 
cause  him  surprise  and  self-reproach  that  he  should  have  extorted  praise 
from  England  and  from  Albemarle  Street,  "sve  will  give  him  *  the  reason 
w^hy.'  We  had  already  and  often  seen  InfalUbility  in  full-dress,  in 
peacock's  plumes ;  Infallibility  fenced  about  with  well-set  lines  of  the- 
ological phrases,  impenetrable  by  us,  the  multitude,  the  uninitiated. 
But  Don  Pasquale  has  taken  us  behind  the  scenes.    He  has  shown  us 


42  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

Infallibility  in  tlie  closet,  Infallibility  in  deslidbille^  Infallibility  able  to 
cut  its  capers  at  will,  to  indulge  in  its  wildest  romps  with  freedom  and 
impunity.  .  And  surely  we  have  now  made  good  the .  assurance  witli 
which  we  began.  If  ever  there  was  a  spectacle,  strange  beyond  all 
former  experience,  and  charged  with  many-sided  instruction  for  man- 
kind, here  it  is.  AYe  will  conclude  by  giving  our  own  estimate,  in  few 
words,  of  the  central  figure  and  of  his  situation. 

In  other  days,  the  days  of  the  great  Pontiffs  who  formidably  compete 
in  historic  grandeur  with  Barbarossa,  and  even  with  Charlemagne,  the 
tremendous  power  which  they  claimed,  and  which  they  often  contrived 
to  exercise,  was  weighted  with  a  not  less  grave  and  telling  responsi- 
bility. The  bold  initiative  of  Gregories  and  Alexanders,  of  Innocents 
and  Bonifaces,  hardly  indeed  could  devise  bigger  and  braver  words 
than  now  issue  from  the  Vatican : 

'  Quae  tuto  tibi  magna  volant,  dum  distinet  hostem 
Agger  murorum,  nee  inundant  sanguine  fossie.'  ^ 

■  But  their  decisions  and  announcements  did  not  operate  as  now 
through  agencies  mainly  silent,  underground,  clandestine ;  the  agencies, 
foi'  example,  of  affiliated  monastic  societies — the  agency  of  the  consum- 
mate scheme  of  Loyola — the  agency,  above  all,  of  that  baneful- system 
of  universal  Direction,  which  unlocks  the  door  of  every  household,  and 
inserts  an  opaque  sacerdotal  medium  between  the  several  members  of 
the  family,  as  well  as  between  the  several  orders  of  the  State.  Their 
warfare  was  the  warfare  of  a  man  with  men.  It  recalls  those  grand 
words  of  King  David,  *  Died  Abner  as  a  fool  dieth  ?  Thy  liands  were 
not  bound  nor  thy  feet  put  into  fetters :  as  a  man  falleth  before  wicked 
men,  so  fellest  thou '  (2  Sam.  iii.  33).  When  they  committed  outrage 
or  excess,  at  least  they  were  liable  to  suffer  for  it  in  a  fashion  very 
different  from  the  '  Calvary '  of  Pope  Pius  IX.  They  had  at  their 
very  gates  the  Barons  of  Pome,  who  then,  at  Igast,  were  barons  in- 
deed; and  the  tramp  of  the  mailed  hosts  of  tlie  Hohenstaufens  was 
ever  in  their  ears.  But  now,  when  the  Pope  knows  that  his  income  is 
secured  by  a  heavy  mortgage  upon  the  credulity  of  millions  upon  mill- 
ions, to  say  nothing  of  the  offers  of  the  Italian  Government  in  reserve, 
and  that  his  outward  conditions  of  existence  are  as  safe  and  easy  as 

^  jEndd,  xi.  383. 


SPEECHES  OF  POPS:  PIUS  IX.  43 

those  of  any  well-to-do  or  luxurious  gentleman  in  Paris  or  in  London, 
his  denunciations,  apart  from  all  personal  responsibility  for  conse- 
quences, lose  their  dignity  in  losing  much  of  their  manhood  and  all 
their  danger ;  and  the  thunders  of  the  Vatican,  though  by  no  means 
powerless  for  mischief  with  a  portion  of  mankind,  yet  in  the  generality 
can  neither  inspire  apprehension  nor  command  respect. 

Let  us  revert  for"  a  moment  to  the  month  of  June,  1846.  , 

A  provincial  Prelate,  of  a  regular  and  simple  life,  endowed  with  de- 
votional susceptibilities,  wholly  above  the  love  of  money,  and  with  a 
genial  and  tender  side  to  his  nature,  but  without  any  depth  of  learn- 
ing, without  wide  information  or  experience  of  the  world,  without  origi- 
nal and  masculine  vigor  of  mind,  without  political  insight,  without  the 
stern  discipline  that  chastens  human  vanity,  and  without  mastery  over 
an  inflammable  temper,  is  placed,  contrary  to  the  general  expectation, 
on  the  pinnacle,  and  it  is  still  a  lofty  pinnacle,  of  ecclesiastical  power. 
It  is  but  fair  towards  him  to  admit  that  his  predecessors  had  bequeathed 
to  him  a  temporal  polity  as  rotten  and  effete  in  all  its  parts  as  the  wide 
world  could  show.  At  the  outset  of  his  Pontificate,  h^  attempted  to 
turn  popular  emotion,  and  the  principles  of  freedom,  to  account  in  the 
interests  of  Church  power.  As  to  ecclesiastical  affairs,  he  dropped  at 
once  into  the  traditions  of  the  Curia.  He  was  and  is  surrounded  by 
flatterers,  who  adroitly  teach  him  to  speak  their  words  in  telling  him 
that  he  speaks  his  own,  and  that  they  are  the  most  wonderful  w^ords 
ever  spoken  by  man.  Having  essayed  the  method  of  governing  by 
liberal  ideas  and  promises,  and  having,  by  a  sad  incompetency  to  con- 
trol the  chargers  he  had  harnesserfto  his  car,  become  (to  say  the  least) 
one  of  the  main  causes  of  the  European  convulsions  of  1848,  he  rushed 
from  the  North  Pole  of  politics  to  the  South,  and  grew  to  be  the  parti- 
san of  Legitimacy,  the  champion  of  the  most  corrupt  and  perjured  Sov- 
ereignties of  Italy — that  is  to  say  of  the  whole  world.  Had  he  only  had 
the  monitions  of  a  free  press  and  of  free  opinion,  valuable  to  us  all, 
but  to  Sovereigns  absolutely  priceless,  and  the  indispensable  condition 
of  all  their  truly  useful  knowledge,  it  might  have  given  him  a  chance ; 
but  these  he  denounces  as  impiety  and  madness.  As  the  age  grows  on 
one  side  enlightened  and  on  another  skeptical,  he  encounters  the  skepti- 
cism with  denunciation,  and  the  enlightenment  with  retrogression.  As 
he  rises  higlier  and  higher  into  the  regions  of  transcendental  obscurant- 


44  SPEECHES  OF  POPE  PIUS  IX. 

ism,  he  departs  by  wider  and  wider  spaces  from  the  living  intellect  of 
man;  lie  loses  Province  after  Province,  he  quarrels  wdtli  Government 
after  Government,  he  generates  Schism  after  Schism ;  and  the  crown- 
ing achievement  of  the  Vatican  Council  and  its  decrees  is  followed,  in 
the  mysterious  counsels  of  Providence,  by  the  passing  over,  for  the  first 
time  in  history,  of  his  temporal  dominions  to  an  orderly  and  national 
Italian  kingdom,  and  of  a  German  Imperial  Crowii  to  the  head  of  a 
Lutheran  King,  who  is  the  summit  and  centre  of  Continental  Protest- 
antism.i 

But  w^hat  then  ?  His  clergy  are  more  and  more  ah  arm}^,  a  police, 
a  caste ;  farther  and  farther  from  the  Christian  Commons,  but  nearer 
to  one  another,  and  in  closer  subservience  to  him.  And  they  have 
made  him  ^The  Infallible;'  and  they  have  promised  he  shall  be  made 
'  The  Great.'  And,  as  if  to  complete  the  irony  of  the  situation,  the 
owners,  or  the  heirs,  of  a  handful  of  English  titles,  formerly  •  unre- 
claimed, are  now  enrolled  upon  the  list  of  his  most  orthodox,  most  ob- 
sequious followers  ;  although  the  mass  of  the  Britit^h  nation  repudiat'^s 
him  more  eagerly  and  resolutely  than  it  has  done  for  many  genera- 
tions. 

Such  is  this  great,  sad,  world-historic  picture.  Sometimes  .it  will 
happen  that,  in  a  great  emporium  of  Art,  a  shrewd  buyer,  after  hear- 
ing the  glowing  panegyric  of  a  veteran  dealer  upon  some  flaming  and 
pretentious  product  of  the  brush,  will  reply.  Yes,  no  doubt,  all  very 
true ;  but  it  is  not  a  good  picture  to  live  with.  So  with  regard  to  that 
sketch  from  the  halls  of  the  Vatican,  which  w^e  have  endeavored  faith 
fully  to  present,  we  ask  the  reader  in  conclusion,  or  ask  him  to  ask 
himself.  Is  it  a  good  picture  to  live  with? 


'  See  the  remarkable  Ti*act  of  Franz  von  Loher,  Ueher  Deutscldands  Weltstellung.     Miin- 
chen,  1874. 


^ 


THE    END. 


rNIVFT^'^'^^T 


^^    (   ■*  TJ.F'^  ^^ 


RETURN     CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 
TOi-^>     202  Main  Library 


LOAN  PERIOD  1 
HOME  USE 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

1  -month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling  642-3405 

6-month  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing  books  to  Circulation 

Desk 

Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  due  date 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


r.'ju 


«.  0.  ..^ 


jtfir^ 


K^ 


"«?or^^ 


■^ 


q  *79 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 
FORM  NO.  DD6,  40m,  3/78  BERKELEY,  CA  94720 


®$ 


:3 

•'i 

